He could try to do that subtly, and without deviating from the good-faith performance of his assigned task, perhaps by writing in a neutral, questioning style about what was going on with the righties these days and carefully raising doubts, undermining foundations, and strategically inserting a knife blade now and then. But would they get it? Didn't he need something a little more emphatic... and a little hipper?
So David started letting his need for lefty approval express itself on the email list, the Journolist, where the cool kids were being intimate and snarky. But those other kids were not tasked with covering conservatives. While they might have been embarrassed if the mean things they wrote in the email were ever leaked, they didn't have careers founded on their suitability for covering conservatives. The risk poor Dave took was of an entirely different nature. Why, Dave, why? Why did you risk the plum job?
“Honestly, it’s been tough to find fresh angles sometimes–how many times can I report that these [tea party] activists are joyfully signing up with the agenda of discredited right-winger X and discredited right-wing group Y?” Weigel lamented in one February email.He also said:
In other posts, Weigel describes conservatives as using the media to “violently, angrily divide America.” According to Weigel, their motives include “racism” and protecting “white privilege,” and for some of the top conservatives in D.C., a nihilistic thirst for power....
Of Matt Drudge, Weigel remarked, “It’s really a disgrace that an amoral shut-in like Drudge maintains the influence he does on the news cycle while gay-baiting, lying, and flubbing facts to this degree.”
“This would be a vastly better world to live in if Matt Drudge decided to handle his emotional problems more responsibly, and set himself on fire.”Such nastiness doesn't hurt Matt of course. Matt drops another link, gets all the traffic, and moves on. Ironically, it is Dave who is undone. Having shown us his vivid hostility to the conservatives he was supposed to explain to us, we no longer have any reason to read him. Having destroyed the appearance of his capacity to enlighten us, he has lit the flame of his own self-immolation.
UPDATE: Weigel resigns.
Various readers suggest that the email-leaker was after Dave’s job. I think the WaPo should have a no-journolister rule for Weigel’s replacement, which would solve that problem, among others.Indeed. One of the problems that might be somewhat solved is the cheeky smugness of the young journalists. The exclusive little club turned deadly for one of its members. And isn't funny how people who should be in the know still don't get modern technology. Tiger Woods brought down by texting, Dave Weigel by email, etc. etc.
AND: In smugger days:
David Weigel|6.14.10 @ 5:01PM|#(Thanks to C3 for pointing to that.)
Well, I really enjoyed the two and a half years I spent here, and I'm constantly confused as to why mentions of my name lead to a lot of schoolyard insults. I really can't figure out why they do it -- lack of fulfillment seems like a good enough theory. After all, I'm here, and they're where I left them in 2008.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to return to my rewarding job and large circle of friends. I don't know how my ego will ever recover...
Posts
243 comments:
1 – 200 of 243 Newer› Newest»I'm reading through the Chronicles of Narnia again, and just happened to start the Silver Chair this week. This post reminded me of this passage, from near the beginning.
"At that moment a voice shouted from behind, a mean, spiteful little voice. 'Now then, Pole,' it squeaked. 'Everyone knows you're there. Down you come.' It was the voice of Edith Jackle, not one of Them herself but one of their hangers-on and tale bearers."
moved this from the earlier post, because it seems more fitting here
Another liberal I have no use for.
Tell me again why the Washington Post matters?
"...we no longer have any reason to read him."
***Easy shot warning***
I thought the fact that he was writing for the WaPo was reason enough.
Fucking great. Burn baby burn.
To me, this episode displays the dichotomy of today's "journalism:" the fake, adjusted, contrived news appears in the print media; the real news, including underying facts, appears on line.
I don't know anyone seriously interested in issues who reads the news section of any major paper.
"He has lit the flame of his own self-immolation".
I hope you are right. :)
Wow, Ann, good post!
The wiggler said:
"like Drudge maintains the influence he does on the news cycle while gay-baiting, lying, and flubbing facts to this degree.”
Every time I see accusations like these, my perception immediately leads me to conclude the accuser is guilty of the same, only to a greater degree.
Kinda like the minister always preaching on adultery.
His preemptive apology in WaPo makes it even worse. His "defense" was that the postings on Journolist were a one-day and ill-considered reaction to a lot of hate email he was getting for his coverage of the Etheridge dust-up. The original offense was an insult to his targeted 'beat' and the pose of objectivity; the defense is an insult to his readers' intelligence.
Way to go, Weigel. Pathetic.
Having shown us his vivid hostility to the conservatives he was supposed to explain to us, we no longer have any reason to read him. Having destroyed the appearance of his capacity to enlighten us, he has lit the flame of his own self-immolation.
Wouldn't it be pretty to think so?
But if having a vivid hostility to conservatives were really a disqualifier, there'd be no one in the legacy media to cover conservatives at all.
it seems like only last week Weigs was taunting people with his plum job and exciting friends, but that's because it was only last week
Dave Weigel on Wikipedia
Journalism "degree", under 30. What should we have expected?
Disappointing a little bit, really. I'd naively hoped that in the tiny % of space devoted to covering conservatism in the MSM, they'd be good sports and let it be the truth. I forgot what absolutists they are when it comes to controlling all that "dangerous" information.
Whether it was tacit or not, his "angle" had to be part of the agreement from the get-go. Because how on earth could the WaPo accurately inform about Tea Partiers, etc.? A huge component of the movement is debunking the likes of the WaPo. They can't have their "Unexpected downturn" story on one page and someone pointing out the collusion/lies of omission that led to it on the next. Scores of other necessarily dissonant coverages come to mind.
I guess I should feel a bit of sympathy over such a reckless self-destruction.
But I feel none.
Every time these aloof, arrogant critics smugly point out the faults of others it only stokes the schadenfreude everyone feels when their own identical hubris brings them down.
Think Dan Rather.
Perhaps we should all go back and read the Greek tragedies, because we're seeing a lot of them these days.
The internet is a reality that all of us share.
All of us.
It's not just a select few who ought to remember that their words (and images) will be recorded forever and come back to bite them.
Cost them jobs.
That's an everyman concern.
People didn't used to have the internet or email lists to vent upon, so stop whining and reserve your venting and drunken carousing for private face-to-face functions like everyone before you had to do.
I can't tell for sure, but is he disabling comments on his Right Now blog seconds after posting updates? I guess that's one way to deal with the situation, you fat baby.
Another stirring chapter in the Great Eternal Bigot Hunt.
The words "discrimination," "bigotry," "homophobia," and "racism" should be expunged from the English language.
This is the age of absolute idiocy and total malice masked with sanctimonious halo preening.
Right now he's looking for a little weigel room.
Here's a telling fight with Weigel and his former employer, Reason and its commentators.
I visit Hit and Run regularly; they are merciless. But the most telling comments come from Esoteric @ 5:01PM.
Painful to watch
well said Anne
Weigel doesn't understand: he thinks he's being attacked for what he wrote on the liberal-journalists-only listserv, when the real problem is that he's on a liberal-journalists-only listserv at all.
Ditto, well said.
Can't get through to the Daily Caller link, tho.
Fuck that guy with a big rubber dick. Burn motherfucker.
Weigel on conservatism almost as good as Sally Quinn on religion.
Another very smart Washington Post writer.
They hire only the smartest and best.
Couldn't you pretty much replace David Weigel with a hate-o-bot program?
Q: Why do conservatives support drilling for oil even after the gulf spill disaster?
A: Because they are evil racist nazi demons.
Q: What do Tea Partiers stand for?
A: Their platform supports Evil, Racism, Nazism, and Demons.
Thank you for your insight Hate-o-Bot! err Weigel.
What about what he said re: Drudge is wrong? I read that page; every day is a new heinous distortion in the service of the conservative movement, or bait for prejudice. If you go there RIGHT NOW he's running a headline that says "the big grab" with a picture of Barney Frank grabbing his pants. Get it????? Barney Frank is GAY and he's grabbing his DICK, because Gays love to touch themselves, and he's also going to TAKE ALL YOUR MONEY and give it to Obama, who is going to give it to the black poors.
F*** Matt Drudge. He's a parasite.
It is better to be covered by an avowed enemy than undercover fifth columnists like Daved Gergen and David Brooks.
It's conservatives who want to "violently, angrily" divide Americans and Matt Drudge should set himself on fire. Tiring to even ask this, but what is it about libs that they don't notice their own cognitive dissonance?
“violently, angrily divide America.”
I see comments like that from the left. Then I remember who riots, breaks, and burns things at G8/G20 protests and the like. Then I remember the sheer number of tea-party-type protests over the last year and the complete lack of riots, breaking, and burning.
MM: You project. The picture is of a man grabbing himself. The caption is of a grab for power. Barney Frank is the co-author of the bill that is being described by the headline. Frank is gay. Are you suggesting that the bill is somehow a gay thing? Because the logic you use to make your point could as easily make the case that the whole bill is a gay thing. It is the "logic" of the insane. Get a grip, as it were.
Aw, Montagne Montaigne, I think it's saucy and cute. Don't you have a sense of humor?
BTW, I'm a gay man and I don't find it offensive.
(Ooops, back to work!)
The media keep treating conservatives like oddities in cages. They seem to think that people outside of their immediate environments see them the same way.
Wow. He can go suck dog asses for all I care.
Do people really want to pretend that the Drudge Report isn't a constant stream of sensationalism demonizing the left? Really? Do we have to go through the archives and post examples?
WV: fecces. Drudge's stock-in-trade.
Reporters should remain anonymous. The ego gets in the way.
If newspapers want balance and honesty in reporting it should look to reporters living outside political bubbles.
Montagne Montaigne,
What? Only gays like to touch themselves? And how is grabbing one's belt remotely like masturbating anyway?
These Drudge-haters are really just illustrating their own own bigotry and ridiculousness.
Dave Weigel simply got caught expressing the attitude most journalists have. I don't see any reason to single him out for condemnation, demand he be punished, or any of the rest of it.
Just make a note of his attitude and adjust your opinion of HIS opinions accordingly.
"Do people really want to pretend that the Drudge Report isn't a constant stream of sensationalism demonizing the left?"
Nobody's disagreeing with that characterization. Demons deserve to be called demons, and God bless Drudge for doing that!
Scott M,
Reality has a vicious, angry right-wing bias that is dividing America.
Another angry, white guy - I hope he gets a therapist so he can learn how to handle his rage better.
Also, how does someone living in the 21st century not understand that anything you send to the Interwebs may eventually be seen.
The man mush not be too bright.
Interestingly during the recent Etheridge unpleasantness, I exchanged tweets with Weigel and referenced your post on his coverage of the assault and how his commenter got right to the point. His response,
"She's not trying to write news. Most of the time I have no idea what she's trying to write."
It is clear that he is not trying to write news either. And he is getting his comeuppance as well.
"Dave Weigel simply got caught expressing the attitude most journalists have. I don't see any reason to single him out for condemnation, demand he be punished, or any of the rest of it."
Just because "most journalists have" that attitude doesn't make it proper or professional. Weigel got caught; he's not being "singled out," and he deserves what he got. Anyone else caught out like that would deserve it too.
Revenant,
As Ann pointed out, the problem is that the WaPo's "conservative beat" is being covered by a guy who clearly despises all things and people conservative.
This would be like assigning an Atkins fanatic to cover a confectioners' convention. It's bad journalism.
Drudge, gay baiting?
The MSM see the tides of conservatism rising by hiring token conservatives, NYT's Brooks, CNN's Parker, ... to ride the tides. Unfortunately, they can't fool anyone but themselves. They would rather have their leaky boats sunk than recruit the "wrong" people to help them bail.
The lefty NNDB website identifies Matt Drudge as being gay; and names his boyfriend. I haven't seen any independent corroboration of this though so treat it as speculation and not fact.
MM,
Drudge is about driving traffic and uses sensationalism to do so. That is pretty upfront. On the other hand you started with the "Big Grab" headline and kept going until you ended up at "black poors", a connection no one else was making. It would appear you are the one with a race issue and are projecting.
Get it????? Barney Frank is GAY and he's grabbing his DICK, because Gays love to touch themselves, and he's also going to TAKE ALL YOUR MONEY and give it to Obama, who is going to give it to the black poors.
And your point is . . . .
Here's some interesting commentary on this dustup from Liz Mair, who isn't a big leftie. But please, don't let me interrupt today's installment of the Two Minutes Hate.
What a surprise, a bunch of blog commentors think that blogs are the way forward for media and that nothing printed on a piece of paper matters! Do you realize that I could walk up to 1000 people on the street in NYC and not hope that even 1 of them knows who Ann Althouse is?
"by a guy who clearly despises all things and people conservative."
I don't know if this is true. I think he likes being liked.
People who want to be liked want to be liked by everyone. So, he's on the journolist, and he's defending himself on reason.org, wanting everyone to see how much of a swell fellow he is. He plays up how important his job is, and how many friends he has, and dismisses people who he sees can't help him in his social progress.
It's nothing so near actual political passion. Some cool kids helped him progress socially and introduced him to even cooler kids. He starts going to the cooler parties and talking bad about his old friends so that the new kids will think he's one of them.
But, he still wants to be liked by everyone so when his old friends hear about his private comments he apologizes and tries to make excuses why he's still the same ol' Dave everyone liked back in the day.
It's not conservative vs. liberal as much as it is the living out of a regular sitcom trope. And all this attack against him from the right won't hurt him, it'll help his credentials with his new cool friends and probably lead to a job on CNN.
I don't have a problem with him being critical. He was a libertarian, coming from that perspective you'd find plenty to be critical about on the Right, and that would be ok. What this reveals, that's dispiriting, is that a libertarian turns full-bore liberal the instant he gets a paycheck from the WaPo or any other such organ. The crime is not that Weigel is anti-right, it's that he demonstrated, abundantly, that there's no there there.
As Weigel's whining deftly illustrates, the reason Drudge is so despised is that he will run stories (like the Monica Lewinsky one) that the left-liberal MSM would prefer to see buried. They're the gatekeepers, he's the guy tunneling under the wall. And they hate him for it.
Ironically, Drudge wouldn't exist without the massive left-liberal bias in the MSM -- there would be no market for him if they were able to report fairly. Gramscian damage is a double-edged sword: by subverting objectivity they've sacrificed credibility and squandered market share.
Do you realize that I could walk up to 1000 people on the street in NYC and not hope that even 1 of them knows who Ann Althouse is?
True, but you could do the same thing for Joe Biden, so your point falls flat.
Here's the difference between someone like Matt Drudge and David Weigel:
Matt Drudge is upfront about what he does with his site - he gladly claims his sensationalism and even his often conservative takes. That is his right and his integrity. You don't have to like or read Drudge - no one is forcing you, so why should you care if anyone else does? Everyone who reads him knows what he does.
David Weigel is a pretender, published in a newspaper that pretends - for who knows what reason(?) - that it is something it really is not. David Weigel got caught being a pretender. That's a loss of integrity.
So, I could spend a good chunk of time spelling out the lack of integrity and moral values that characterize the average liberal American, but why waste the time. Libs such as Monty have proven it for me by their constant attempt to equivocate 2 things that are not even close to being the same.
Doesn't it ever just get exhausting living one's life by the creed "Oh Yeah? Well your side does it too!"?
Do you realize that I could walk up to 1000 people on the street in NYC and not hope that even 1 of them knows who Ann Althouse is?
Ok, granted....so tell me what is the financial trajectory of Althouse, as compared say to the NYT?
In 10 years will you be able to walk up to folks in NYC and mention the NYT, as anything OTHER THAN an historical artifact?
There's no doubt more folks know of and read the NYT than Althouse, but remember quality matters too, just like GM was bigger than Toyota, until recently...but STILL GM was hemorrhaging money, and Toyota wasn’t and in the long-run it didn’t take a Peter Drucker to see how that was going to turn out. Just like it doesn’t take a Marshall McLuhan to see how the NYT/blog fight is going to turn out.
I thought this post by Weigel to Journolist was the most troubling: "I'd politely encourage everyone to think twice about rewarding the Examiner with any traffic or links for a while."
Bad enough that Journolist is a way of getting liberals on a common set of talking points. But worse if it's being used to create a boycott of those sites that have the effrontery to publish something wounding to liberals. Choosing whom to link to on the basis of rewarding/punishing media outlets seems like a serious deviation from what the role of online journalists is supposed to be.
"Doesn't it ever just get exhausting living one's life by the creed "Oh Yeah? Well your side does it too!"?"
How about living your life by, "you did it to us so we can do it to you, even if it's wrong" which is the MO of conservatives since 2008?
Who cares if Matt Drudge or anyone else is gay or straight?
This is the 21st century, please take your baiting elsewhere.
It's potentially a moot point now. Looks like Davey just resigned.
You can hate Drudge, but you're only hurting yourself. Ask any journalist if he doesn't click on Drudge 50 times a day. If he says he doesn't, he's lying. Whatever you think of him, he's generally spot on in terms of identifying the big stories. The Left decry him because he likes to highlight and ridicule the Left, but really he'll go after anyone if he thinks the story is big enough.
Paddy,
As a longtime Reason reader, I've never seen anything that would suggest his Journolistic passions are anything but sincere. He made his bones with the WaPo crowd by denouncing "extremists" -- the vast majority on the right, of course.
I'm not sure how someone like him ever got in at Reason, his libertarisn leanings always seemed perfunctory.
The Right takes ANOTHER scalp….another victim of the Uber-Recht Gleichshaltung, joining that nice Mr. Jones and the winsome Ms Dunn. When will the insanity end? I hope you all are happy now!?!?
Does this mean Mr. Weigel has to go home and have his mother re-heat his dinner? What about his circle of friends? Is it still large and growing? Will they still be his friends? Will Reason give him his old job, back? Could Drudge be persuaded to hire him, as an intern?
Weigel plays with fire, and gets burned.
"Under 30 and majored in journalism". That could be a litmus test. It indicates your IQ can't be more than 90-95.
It's hilarious how Drudge will win at this every time. The guy never gives interviews. He doesn't offer up his own voice. All he does is post the link and he's won. Look how he handled Weigel--just another headline.
How about living your life by, "you did it to us so we can do it to you, even if it's wrong" which is the MO of conservatives since 2008?
I can't imagine a better thing to do or a better reason to do it.
In a perfect world, he would have been fired because his boss screamed at him, "What the fuck are you doing spending all day chatting to your liberal jackoff buddies? You're on the conservative beat, go network with conservatives, dumbshit, and you might actually come back with something to print in the goddam paper you might recall we put out once in a while around here!"
Sadly, Jason Robards only played the editor of the Post in movies.
"Do you realize that I could walk up to 1000 people on the street in NYC and not hope that even 1 of them knows who Ann Althouse is?"
Fame isn't a guarantor of good and honest analysis, in fact it may be an obstacle.
Think of all the drivel that we endure from Dowd, but everyone in the upper-west side knows her.
btw, he resigned.
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/newspapers/breaking_weigel_resigns__165850.asp
Weigel Ends
Drudge Link Hit Hardest
Aw, he will be missed. But some time at the range would fix that.
I can't imagine a better thing to do or a better reason to do it.
Elegant.
Well-crafted, sir.
The blogfather: "SEEMS UNNECESSARY: Dave Weigel resigns. Unless there’s more we haven’t heard."
Ann provides.
Instead, Weigel solved his own emotional problems and set himself on fire.
Sorry to see him go. His bias was very transparent. No finesse there. His replacement will likely be someone equally prejudiced but more circumspect.
Lefties are drawn to the flame. The last vestiges of self-restraint were abandoned in the 1960's. The joy with discovering yourself to be one of the most insightful, moral, and clever living among the dolts is the main currency of the left. It reminds me of the ugly girls with big tits dancing dancing naked at outdoor concerts forty years ago: everything shakin' would have been much better concealed for all involved.
"What about what he said re: Drudge is wrong?"
Monty, the best response to your question was given by Lance @ 10:23.
haha - that jackass weigel just resigned.
Weigel's failure is that his Journolist postings are as dull as his WaPo blog postings.
Sully:
"The Dish has long seen Dave Weigel as one of the brightest stars in the next generation of journalists. He deserves to prosper. But he needs to get off that listserv."
So it's not that he's biased - he should just keep it to himself. God - Sully just keeps getting better and better...
@Montagne Montaigne
Yeah, it is. How's it feel?
That's what every single MSM outlet (minus Fox) is like for conservatives. You've got one guy on a website. The reason he's so influential is that there was a largely underserved market for him to tap.
My naive/idealistic undergrad degree was in journalism. The pressure to be an arch liberal was such that it was pointless to continue, and so I left to spend a few interim years in the dumb-as-a-bag-of-rocks music industry before moving on. (And speaking of the Land of the Undead, Rolling Stone must be happy to be relevant again for five minutes.)
And I'm indy for God's sake. I have points of agreement with both sides. I come from a relatively conservative neighborhood in SoCal and I know intimately both that conservatives have their positives, and that the liberal side has quite huge negatives - especially ( and ironically) for women.
btw, he resigned.
He resigned or was asked to resign?
Will he step back and re-evaluate?
The solution for Wiegel was easy. Change your opinion of conservatives, and start writing only positive things about them, even in a private email list. What does Druge need to do? Nothing! He IS a conservative!
Quite the opposite. Always write what you really think, is the lesson.
He had a false life column.
I wonder if he's still bragging about his sweet WaPo job over at Reason?
"How's my ass taste now bitch? Wait a minute..."
A competent journalist would understand the difference between covering conservatives and countering them. Weigel confused the two.
Monty--I am devoted reader of drudge not because I necessarily subscribe to whatever political philosophy he adheres to, but because all he does is provide links.--As to Drudge's choice of pictures, he has quite a track record of picturing our politicos in the least favorable terms--now if you think Mr Frank's picture suggest an attack on his sexuality, then I suspect you might be projecting a bit.
Here's my take: Drudge has changed American "Journalism" in a profound way. You may not agree, but thats OK
I guess the WaPo was looking for someone who could at least convincingly feign being objective about the topic on which he was reporting. FAIL.
Really? Weigel did all that? In an afternoon? 6 days and a day of rest?
No kiddin'?
Re the NYT-I read it only for the cross word puzzle--it the high point of their print edition. Although the WSJ is coming on VERY strong with their Saturday puzzles.
how many times can I report that these [tea party] activists are...
I'm interested in the brackets, did he originally use teabaggers I wonder?
Drudge says Weigel has resigned from the WaPo. Absolutely delightful. The man stands humiliated.
Barney Frank is GAY and he's grabbing his DICK
Well I looked at the picture and it looks like Barney is hiking his pants by pulling on his belt. Then again I guess we all see what we want to see. Monty only sees hate I guess.
Are there any liberals who post here that haven't completely lost their minds? Anyone? Bueller?
Harry House: hey man--where are the creds you promised to email me?
Nine patents, hero of the soviet union and all the rest of that stuff? Tell us Harry--you were just lying, werent you. but again, send me that stuff, and if you have the creds you claim, my apology will be forthcoming immediately. Go for it Harry.
Having shown us his vivid hostility to the conservatives he was supposed to explain to us, we no longer have any reason to read him. Having destroyed the appearance of his capacity to enlighten us, he has lit the flame of his own self-immolation.
Having read Mr. Weigel's writing some time ago, I had already developed a reason not to read him well before L'Affaire JournoList.
Ahhhh, the sweet smell and taste of schadenfreude.
Ahhhh, the sweet smell and taste of schadenfreude.
Agreed. But you are aware, are you not, that every time that word is used about a liberal, God kills a kitten?
As the wheels-are-coming-off (WACO) faster and faster, we're going to be knee-deep in dead kitties.
Does this mean Mr. Weigel has to go home and have his mother re-heat his dinner? What about his circle of friends? Is it still large and growing? Will they still be his friends? Will Reason give him his old job, back? Could Drudge be persuaded to hire him, as an intern?
Don't worry about Mr. Weigel. Now that he's reestablished his liberal bona-fides, no doubt he'll be snapped up by some openly liberal rag (e.g. NYT, Mother Jones) where he'll write series of columns telling the "inside scoop" on conservatives. A book deal likely is already in the works, "Conservatives in the Mist" or something like it.
Hey, HD! Did you know you've hit the big time?
Here's my take: Drudge has changed American "Journalism" in a profound way. You may not agree, but thats OK
A hyper-partisan tabloidy news aggregate with the occasional Exclusive Hoax. Oy.
Mr House has exposed his abject ignorance to probably 3 billion participants on the world wide web. Quite an accomplishment harry--right up there with your nine patents. But do carry on.
Garage--is that a response? Please note I gave that as a personal opinion and indicated as such. But do carry on.
Early word in NRO Corner is that Weigel will be working for the Huffington Post.
If it's true, just goes to show.
I wonder if Weigel is doing a David Brock-style political sex change?
@Larry J: You nailed it.
Maybe Weigel will be awarded the first annual David Brock Award for Journalistic Excellence.
Dark Eden said... Couldn't you pretty much replace David Weigel with a hate-o-bot program?
Q: Why do conservatives support drilling for oil even after the gulf spill disaster?
A: Because they are evil racist nazi demons.
Q: What do Tea Partiers stand for?
A: Their platform supports Evil, Racism, Nazism, and Demons.
Hey, I can do this, and I don't need a computer. Racist and Nazi are easy, but demon is either demon or demonic. Evil is an adjective, and I'm not sure of it's form as a noun.
Evil, racist, Nazi demons.
Evil, Nazi, racist demons.
Evil, racist, demonic Nazis.
Evil, demonic, racist Nazis.
And so on and so forth...
I hope you get the idea. Yawn.
Hey, if there was a Wordpress plug-in that would answer posts with leftist rhetorical formula phrases, I'd open up comments on my blog and use it. :)
Don't worry about Mr. Weigel. Now that he's reestablished his liberal bona-fides, no doubt he'll be snapped up by some openly liberal rag (e.g. NYT, Mother Jones) where he'll write series of columns telling the "inside scoop" on conservatives.
What makes him a liberal in your opinion? That he gave a critical take on a conservative privately? Jesus balls. Now even a Paultardian from Reason is a de-facto liberal because he something mean about a conservative.
Garage--is that a response?
My guess is that garage is sticking with his usuall one liner snarks rather than actually, you know, provide something of substance since he's been pwning himself everytime he attempts it.
First it was Pat Buchanan then it was accusing Althouse of not showing the slightest interest in GOP sex scandals despite Rev showing a multitude of Althouse posts on...GOP sex scandals. I guess that means even though Althouse blogged about them she didn't express the slightest interest.
Make of that what you will.
I think whats funny is all Drudge does is link to a news story and rewrite the title header and somehow he's become Joseph Goebbels to the left.
Hoosier
I guess that makes you interested in Obama, and anything about liberals, since you blogged about it. What makes liberals so interesting to you? You can't stop blogging about them!
National Review says he's headed to the Huffington Post. Quelle surprise.
wv: lesterre. What M. Weigel had for le petit dejeuner.
Those journolist e-mails stunk of someone desperate to fit in. They really did read like liberal trolling. Honestly, I think Weigal was a real life journalist version of the protagonist in that Off Spring song "Pretty Fly for a White Guy". He was so desperate to be one of the "cool journalists" on the list, that he no doubt annoyed them.
And since all of those clowns are never got passed adolescence, they kicked him out of the group by leaking his e-mails. I think Weigal is a douche. But I kind of feel sorry for him. Those people on journolist are total assholes.
I didn't realize until today he had defended Rand Paul a few days ago. That no doubt is what did it. It is a real window into those people's souls. In a different time and place, Klein and company would be down denouncing people to the NKVD. They truly are useless swine.
I've always thought of Drudge like the movie The Shipping News:
Billy: It's finding the center of your story, the beating heart of it, that's what makes a reporter. You have to start by making up some headlines. You know: short, punchy, dramatic headlines. Now, have a look, what do you see?
[Points at dark clouds at the horizon]
Billy: Tell me the headline.
Quoyle: Horizon Fills With Dark Clouds?
Billy: Imminent Storm Threatens Village.
Quoyle: But what if no storm comes?
Billy: Village Spared From Deadly Storm.
What makes him a liberal in your opinion? That he gave a critical take on a conservative privately? Jesus balls. Now even a Paultardian from Reason is a de-facto liberal because he something mean about a conservative.
It is not enough to write about the Movement. One must love the Movement. Or else.
What makes him a liberal in your opinion? That he gave a critical take on a conservative privately?
That he's a member of Journolist? A collection of liberal journalists?
I mean that kind of speaks for itself garage. Jesus balls is right.
What makes him a liberal in your opinion? That he gave a critical take on a conservative privately? Jesus balls.
Not that he dissed A CONSERVATIVE, but evinced a disdain for the MOVEMENT he covered....
But thank you for contributing.
@somefeller
It is not enough to write about the Movement. One must love the Movement. Or else.
Why are you trying to hijack the thread to talk about feminists and environmentalists?
I guess that makes you interested in Obama, and anything about liberals, since you blogged about it. What makes liberals so interesting to you? You can't stop blogging about them!
Well yes garage, I am interested in Obama, he's the President of the US of KKKA. As a responsible citizen I should be interested in the President.
What makes liberals interesting? Well for starters, they like to self-congratualte themselves on how tolerant, understanding, caring and smart they are but the more I interact with them the more I find out they're the most intolerant group of dumbasses around. I guess I'm just fascinated by the cognitive dissonance.
Yes garage the fact she blogged about those scandals demonstrated a 'slight interest' by fucking definition! I mean how thick are you? Is there anyone who blogs about something they have no interest in? Maybe you can start the garage mahal disinteresting things blog and show me where I'm wrong.
Matt Drudge 1, Weigel... Who's he?
"It is not enough to write about the Movement. One must love the Movement. Or else."
That defiitely explains why the swine at journolist leaked the e-mails.
If you write snarky comments that Stalin would approve of; yet are the proud owner of German sedans that cost more than the take-home pay of the average American worker, that's not cognitive dissonance.
That's psychosis.
Gee Garage I don’t know….let’s play “what if”
What IF Weigel wrote:
““Honestly, it’s been tough to find fresh angles sometimes–how many times can I report that these Civil Rights activists are joyfully signing up with the agenda of discredited Negro Activist X and discredited Coloured Person’s Advancement Group Y?”
Or wrote:
In other posts, Weigel describes Civil Rights activists as using the media to “violently, angrily divide America.” According to Weigel, their motives include “racism” and protecting “Black privilege,” and for some of the top Liberals in D.C., a nihilistic thirst for power....
Or:
“This would be a vastly better world to live in if Ralph Abernathy decided to handle his emotional problems more responsibly, and set himself on fire.”
And that the Washington Post had assigned Mr. Weigel to cover the then-current Civil Rights Movement, in the South. Would you or anyone say that Mr. Weigel is the right man to cover the issue? And could it plausibly be said that Weigel did NOT support the Civil Rights Movement? And that members of the Movement might, justifiably, be suspicious of Mr. Weigel, from then on? And would that not make him a liability as a reporter?
Just some “What If” questions.
.
I mean that kind of speaks for itself garage. Jesus balls is right.
He calls himself a libertarian first of all. He is a defender of libertarian prindiples.[such as they are] He likes Rand Paul and Ron Paul. He was a contributing editor at Reason Magazine, and blogger for Reason.com. That would tell me he isn't a lock stock liberal. But to you, it could mean something else completely.
garage, the reason readers caled him a democrat shill, always.
What IF Weigel wrote:
I don't care what anyone writes in private. Presumably, even conservatives talk amongst themsleves!
"I don't care what anyone writes in private. Presumably, even conservatives talk amongst themsleves!"
Then I would hope you are angry at the vindictive cock sucker who leaked the e-mails knowing it would ruin Weigel's career.
And I take it everyone here is right on board with the little tattle tale liberal who leaked the emails to Matt Drudge?
I don't care what anyone writes in private. Presumably, even conservatives talk amongst themsleves!
Sure you do, what if Bush had written, to Laura, on the occasion of their anniversary, “Laura, my love, the fact of the matter is I KNEW there were no WMD’s in Iraq, I merely went there for the oil.” Were this to become PUBLIC, you and every Liberal would be screaming “IMPEACH!” What we say in private is, more often than not, what we believe…and that window onto the soul is priceless! Mr. Weigel showed us he didn’t care for his subject(s). Your argument rings hollow.
And I take it everyone here is right on board with the little tattle tale liberal who leaked the emails to Matt Drudge?
Why would we be? Are you angry at the IRS official who was "Deep Throat?"
"And I take it everyone here is right on board with the little tattle tale liberal who leaked the emails to Matt Drudge?"
I am not. See my post above. The people on that list are swine.
The JournoList listserv was designed by Ezra Klein as a mechanism to get the liberal policy wonks and their fellow-travelers in the media to sing from the same sheet of music.
If you believe that an independent media is an important part of maintaining a democracy, you would have to be repelled that the JournoList listserv even exists.
Interesting how the usual suspects talk about The Movement as if it's a Conservative-Libertarian thing. Anyone who's either knows they're about as disconnected, contrarian a bunch who ever argued with each other over what works and what doesn't.
Now, the Lefties, they're uniform, regimented, in complete lockstep with each other and those who send them off with their talking points each day. They're The Movement.
A movement, anyway.
John
Hell yea. I hope he/she pays for it somehow down the road. When you screw with someone's lively-hood like that there should be hell to pay.
Garage--be careful of the questions you ask--I have no problem with the asshole on that journolist who liked Wiegal's bullshit--I am sure, of course, you have no problem with CIA pukes, and the state department pukes who leak anything the Risens (NYT) of this world--
Thats the way the game is played in DC--if you arent smart enough to recognize it, then stay on the porch and dont try to run with the big dogs
The DC--and journalist world-relies on scumbas who will leak any thing and everything if it serves their interest--and that comment applies to the left and the right.
As Harry Truman said--you want a friend in DC? get a dog.
Journalists are dogs, bitches and scumbags--The internet has served, like toto, to expose the assholes like the assholes they are.
An honest journalist is an oxymoron.
"Hell yea. I hope he/she pays for it somehow down the road. When you screw with someone's lively-hood like that there should be hell to pay."
I agree. I have never liked Weigel. But leaking those e-mails was not right. It is not like he did some rant in a public forum. You don't leak someone's private e-mail they send to you, no matter how vile it is.
Joe: point of order--it was Mark Felt, the deputy director of the FBI, who was deep throat--
agree. I have never liked Weigel. But leaking those e-mails was not right. It is not like he did some rant in a public forum. You don't leak someone's private e-mail they send to you, no matter how vile it is.
Really? And if this person is about to become someone important or powerful, you keep these vile emails secret? I say you do, ONLY IF you agree with their sentiments. What you say to other people is ALWAYS going to be available for Public Consumption. You don’t want it known, don’t tell another person, “Whisper it down a well at Midnight.”
But I like where this is going, Liberal gets comeuppance, and instead of discussing the Liberal, now we move to the ETHICS of the comeuppance…. Well played Garage.
Garage: You should be alert to the fact that lefties always rat out the weak among them. Beware.
Joe: point of order--it was Mark Felt, the deputy director of the FBI, who was deep throat--
My bad, I realize you are right and ackowledge my mistake. In my defense I'm only a libertarian-conservaitve and not a powerful and influential Liberal intellect.
John: if you are stupid enough to put something on the internet and somehow think it will remain private, you are one dumb son of a bitch. Fuck Weigel-anyone that stupid should not be allowed to breed. But thats just my opinion.
@John: It's a listserv. Any email that gets sent to the listserv address gets reflected out to everyone else in the list. As such it's not really "private;" but apparently in order to be a member, you have to agree to not forward emails to people outside the list.
Feh. As they say, if you want loyalty in D.C., buy a dog.
I would agree with the observation posted earlier in this thread that somebody had it in for Weigel.
"But I like where this is going, Liberal gets comeuppance, and instead of discussing the Liberal, now we move to the ETHICS of the comeuppance…."
Just because bad shit happens to someone I don't like or agree with, doesn't make said shit right. And yeah, Weigel does bear some fault in this. But as much as anything that fault if for thinking people like Jeffrey Toobin and Ezra Klein are fully functioning human beings. Weigel apparently is no better. But that doesn't make the whole sewer smell any better.
Loyalty + Dog canard: Roger J gets firsties.
Montaigne wrote:
NOW he's running a headline that says "the big grab" with a picture of Barney Frank grabbing his pants. Get it????? Barney Frank is GAY and he's grabbing his DICK, because Gays love to touch themselves, and he's also going to TAKE ALL YOUR MONEY and give it to Obama, who is going to give it to the black poors.
Perhaps you're reaching a bit here? Because first, I'm not aware of a stereotype where gays like to touch themselves, second he's not touching his dick. And third the suggestion is YES that big govt IS going to use it's power to seize control of or force it's will down the throat of various corporations. ANy suggestion that the anger is directed because govt is going to give it to the black poors is merely your conjecture,snark and straw manning.
I reallize that the words "The Big Grab" is open to interpretation, but perhaps your respsonse says more about your own hatreds and bigotry than it does about Drudge's.
You should write for the Washington Post and cover conservatives. I hear there's an opening.
General comment for the liberal commenters here: (And I speak as a centrist, as bad of a term as that is)
If a "conservative" pundit:
1) Is broadly disliked (or his opinions are disliked) by conservatives
and/or
2) His gig is only with liberal talk shows
and/or
3) He used to work for _________ (your favorite conservative paper/magazine/politician/think tank here)
He's not a conservative.
Now that doesn't necessarily means his opinions are wrong but they are likely to
a) give liberal listeners a certain self-satisfaction and
b) further piss off conservatives and thus prove the bias that they're all blind and angry
Joe--not meant to be a criticism--if you took it that way, my apologies
And what Weigel should do now is simple, hopefully he kept all the e-mails from the list serve and now can release all those old emails one day at a time from his new blog. Ezra, Krugman, Yglesias...let people see how the talking points are disseminated.
Joe--not meant to be a criticism--if you took it that way, my apologies
None taken, I was trying to be tongue-in-cheek, but failed...Uh-oh...."tongue-in-cheek" will that be taken as homophobia by Jeremy/Monty?
D@mn.....
Scott as I am sure you know, Harry Truman is the alleged source of that bon mot--god I wish we had a president like Harry Truman again.
c3
I never said Weigel was a conservative. Libertarian. Libertarian leaning? I don't think Weigel claims he is a conservative either. Hell I wouldn't know anymore anyway.
@Joe: Depends on which cheeks you are referring to. :)
I never said Weigel was a conservative. Libertarian. Libertarian leaning? I don't think Weigel claims he is a conservative either. Hell I wouldn't know anymore anyway.
Well, apparently, he wasn’t well-loved at Reason.com and wasn’t too missed by the readers. To be fair to Mr. Weigel, the readers over there are pretty outré and can be daggone vicious.
OK Joe--thanks, but now you owe me a new monitor having spewed coffee all over it.
Do you know that I can speak to millions of people in America, and none of them will know anyone who lives in NYC? Some foreigners have visited NYC and think they have actually been to America. That’s probably why the US has such a bad reputation overseas.
One good thing about this is that other journ-o-list members are now going to have to watch their backs.
The list is like a mine-field now.
To be fair to Mr. Weigel, the readers over there (Reason) are pretty outré and can be daggone vicious.
You can snark all you want over there about conservatives, make vile jokes about Palin, rant on and on about Bush & Cheney, as long as you throw in a line about "and keep the government's hands off my pot!"
"You can snark all you want over there about conservatives, make vile jokes about Palin, rant on and on about Bush & Cheney, as long as you throw in a line about "and keep the government's hands off my pot!"
You clearly have never actually read the magazine or Hit and Run. There are a lot of very intelligent posters over there. They are generally of much higher quality than what happens at Althouse. And further, Reason is about the only magazine that covers the excess of the drug war (the trail of dead dogs, terrorized grandmothers and innocent people left by our increasingly militarized police force).
I don't always agree with them. I am very much a house gadfly over there and a conservative not a libertarian. But if you think that your description is acurate, you are a complete ignoramous.
interesting to me is the outrage about a leaker on a listserve--its leakers throughout the federal government that keep the "jouralists" in business but apparently some leaks are better than others.
and lets assume I spelled journalists correctly in my last post. thank you
You can snark all you want over there about conservatives, make vile jokes about Palin, rant on and on about Bush & Cheney, as long as you throw in a line about "and keep the government's hands off my pot!"
Having dealt with their kind in my life, I understand the worst epithet possible is “STATIST,” I understand it’s the equivalent of “Capitalist Roader” or “Fascist.”
And its really not that hard to find diversity of opinion among conservative pundits/bloggers
(I'm sure the same can be said for liberal pundits/bloggers.)
You just need to ignore the shouts of many commenters (or is that commentators) shouting:
"But he's not a TRUE conservative!!!!!
Journalism "degree", under 30. What should we have expected?
Exactly.
Irrespective of ideology, no one should be allowed to call themselves a "pundit" if they are under 40 if their only experience has been as a journalist. This is the Post's mistake. Make Klein, Weigel and the rest of them go out and report and analyze news, sans ideology or anything personal at all. A pundit is not just a spouter of opinions -- you can go to the party organs for that, or the unpaid blogosphere. A pundit is supposed to guide and seek to persuade, anticipating and answering objections to their positions using facts and logic. If, to make your point, you can only resort to invective -- even among your friends, who should be more receptive to your attempts to wrestle with an idea -- then you are not ready to be a pundit.
Kaus' phrase, "The Juicebox Mafia" (did he coin that?) is so apt. I don't care where these pipsqueaks went to college. Their frames of reference are so narrow that nothing they say would ever inspire anyone to reconsider their points of view. And if they can't do that, just give them pom-poms and plaid skirts, because they are about as substantive as cheerleaders. (Weigel was a particularly weird kind of cheerleader -- dressed in the uniform of one team while cheering for the other.)
"interesting to me is the outrage about a leaker on a listserve--its leakers throughout the federal government that keep the "jouralists" in business but apparently some leaks are better than others."
It is not so much "outrage" as it is stating the obvious. It would be one thing if one of those creatures just posted the e-mails and said here. But to do it anonomously is pretty low. And further, Dave Weigel is not the government. His being a dousch isn't costing me any money or affecting the public trust.
I really disapointed in the posters on here. They can't get past their schadenfreude over Weigel to admit what was a pretty dastardly deed. That doesn't mean you have to like Weigel. But you can admit whoever leaked this is scum.
Being able to call a spade a spade even when it doesn't cut your way is the difference between having principles and being a hack.
You clearly have never actually read the magazine or Hit and Run. There are a lot of very intelligent posters over there. They are generally of much higher quality than what happens at Althouse. And further, Reason is about the only magazine that covers the excess of the drug war (the trail of dead dogs, terrorized grandmothers and innocent people left by our increasingly militarized police force).
Wow, I guess we’ve been put in our place…tell me John can you give me the definition of “militarized police?” And can you answer me how if the Peace Officer is wearing combat boots and tases me that makes it ever so much worse, than if s/he are just wearing their “standard issue” (for kicking down your door).
A pundit is supposed to guide and seek to persuade, anticipating and answering objections to their positions using facts and logic.
The whole fucked up thing about this is that if Weigel had been blowing kisses at conservatives in emails, we wouldn't even be talking about this. Or questioning his motives. Would you? I highly doubt it.
But to do it anonomously is pretty low. And further, Dave Weigel is not the government. His being a dousch isn't costing me any money or affecting the public trust.
I really disapointed in the posters on here. They can't get past their schadenfreude over Weigel to admit what was a pretty dastardly deed. That doesn't mean you have to like Weigel. But you can admit whoever leaked this is scum.
Why are they scum? I’m not seeing why it’s so awful to publish what someone said? And isn’t that what journalists, DO? IF it was John McCain’s, Palin’s, Obama’s, or Rahm’s e-mails, and they revealed criminality or malice, would it be OK, or still scum to reveal? Was “Deep Throat” scum? John, are YOU Weigel? Are you his brother? Or his mother, afraid she’ll have to go back to re-heating his dinners, whilst he bangs away on the key board in the basement?
for once Weigel is the beneficiary of his inexperience instead of the rest of us.
The whole fucked up thing about this is that if Weigel had been blowing kisses at conservatives in emails, we wouldn't even be talking about this. Or questioning his motives. Would you? I highly doubt it.
WE wouldn’t be, but YOU would be…over at Kos and HuffPo.
"John can you give me the definition of “militarized police?”"
Yes I can Joe. Allow me to please educate you to the wonderful world of SWAT teams. And further, understand I am a former criminal prosecutor and a military combat veteran. I have put people in jail for decades. So don't give me the "you dope smoking hippie" routine.
Let's start
http://www.freep.com/article/99999999/NEWS01/100517026/1318/Mourners-bid-a-tearful-good-bye-to-little-Aiyana&template=theme&theme=AIYANA_JONES_SHOOTING
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbwSwvUaRqc&feature=related
http://www.thenortheastgeorgian.com/articles/2009/09/18/news/top_stories/02topstory.txt
There is a couple of good examples for you to start. I would also encourage you to google DOD grants to police departments. DOD often gives surplus military equipment to police departments. That is a militarized police department.
No knock raids are a menace. They terrorized an innocent mayor of a small town near DC last year, including murdering his dogs.
Weigel is really nothing more than a sandy vagina at this point.
Joe,
Weigel is a dork and an idiot. He is not a criminal. You can't compare leaking his rantings to turning over evidence of a crime.
Ultimately, those things were private e-mails. If Weigel had admitted to stealing or killing his girlfriend you would have a point. But they are nothing of the sort. They were not released to disclose a crime. They were released to embarass him.
Stop being a hack for God's sake. I am on your side and you are embarassing me. Jesus, you are making garage look reasonable.
(Thanks to C3 for pointing to that.)
She likes me!! she likes me!!
As I thought, No you don’t have a definition…so surplus military gear makes you militarized? So a cheap helicopter and your “militarized?” No Knocks are over-used, not a MENACE….btw, how many people have died in No Knocks over the last 25 years? How many in “hot Pursuits?” How many in 5 gallon paint cans? And why are No Knocks the same as “militarized?” So if the Cops serve a No Knock in a Flak Jacket with an MP-5 that’s militarized, but if they are in their street uniform with service revolvers, they’re not?
You get back to me…..
Richard Dolan said...
His preemptive apology in WaPo makes it even worse. His "defense" was that the postings on Journolist were a one-day and ill-considered reaction to a lot of hate email he was getting for his coverage of the Etheridge dust-up. The original offense was an insult to his targeted 'beat' and the pose of objectivity; the defense is an insult to his readers' intelligence.
Way to go, Weigel. Pathetic.
Bottom line was is that Weigel saw one leftard committing a crime and came and ran cover for him by literally fabricating an illusion to the rest of us. There is nothing worse in life than being a leftard tool and a leftard tool that knows he's a lying sack of sub-human crap. Fuck him and I hope he gets black-balled wherever he goes. His name should Whiner, not Weigel.
John, I can envision a scenario where a liberal with a conscience outed Weigs because of the integrity issue. Not saying that's what happened, but it could have.
WE wouldn’t be, but YOU would be…over at Kos and HuffPo.
Never commented, or even read comments at HuffPo. And I've commented 17 times at Dkos, all in 2008, blasting the diary and/or author. Bzzzt. Check for yourself, my same screen name.
Roger J. said...
"well lots of stuff"
you are just a tiresum bore. Look them up yourself. i don't give a rat's ass (meaning you) if you believe me or not and i'll be damned if i lift a finger other than to poke you in that one central eye of yours.
i've got what i've got and you've got what you got. hd 10 rogerdoger zip..
anytime, any subject, facts only roger dodger...and i'll beat you like a rented mule.
Weigel is a dork and an idiot. He is not a criminal. You can't compare leaking his rantings to turning over evidence of a crime.
Didn’t just compare it to crimes…I pointed out that IF Palin, McCain or Rahm had put their inner-most thoughts into words and shared them, well that’d be worth the read to someone. IF they don’t want those inner-most thoughts to be known, they don’t tell anyone. Certainly no one on a listserve.
garage mahal said...
The whole fucked up thing about this is that if Weigel had been blowing kisses at conservatives in emails, we wouldn't even be talking about this. Or questioning his motives. Would you? I highly doubt it.
There you go projecting and fantasy wishing again. Doesn't that get old for you? Really, if Weigel was a conservative, the expectation would have been that he would have done a good, credible, job to report the facts as he say them without the flavor of his ideology getting in the way. Even if his ideology did get in the way, most likely he would have been brought to task just like Weigel did and even more so from conservatives.
Besides, you're just a fucking idiot and a liar anyway. You don't have any credibility or respect here at all.
Never commented, or even read comments at HuffPo. And I've commented 17 times at Dkos, all in 2008, blasting the diary and/or author. Bzzzt. Check for yourself, my same screen name.
Well then let me re-PHRASE, Liberals would be…over at Kos and HuffPo….even if Garage wouldn’t be.
Still haven't got laid yet Meth?
That's too bad buddy.
HDHouse said...
Roger J. said...
"well lots of stuff"
you are just a tiresum bore. Look them up yourself. i don't give a rat's ass (meaning you) if you believe me or not and i'll be damned if i lift a finger other than to poke you in that one central eye of yours.
i've got what i've got and you've got what you got. hd 10 rogerdoger zip..
anytime, any subject, facts only roger dodger...and i'll beat you like a rented mule.
You aren't entitled to your own facts, you washed up cadaver. Now go put your teeth back in, your boiled carrots are cut up for you and ready to gum just in case your polydent didn't do a good enough job.
Joe,
You are an idiot. How can possibly condone the cops kicking in a door and terrorizing people? Also, they are absolutely a menace to officer safety. The biggest protection an officer has is his badge. No one wants to turn a drug case into a captial offense by killing cop.
But, if someon kicks down my door, I can tell you I am going to assume they are there to do me harm and I will shoot them, as any home owner should. Further, cops are usually so poorly trained that they often shoot each other in these raids. That is what happened in Atlanta a few years ago when they shot and killed an elderly woman who was the vicim of a false warrent.
Lastly, talk to anyone with any military experience and ask them what the most dangerous thing you can do in the infantry. And they will tell you clearing a house. Going into a house with someone inside it meaning to do you harm is absoulutely nuts. The military would never do it. They would call in indirect fire or they would give the person a chance to come out. But they would only as a last option go in after them. The cops in contrast charge in like rampaging buffalos. It is dangerous for them and everyone around them.
I gave you links to several cases were innocent people died in thise raids. Use google yourself and see. Even one is too many. And for every person killed there are hundreds of cases where children are terrorized and pets needlessly killed. If something like the film of the Missouri raid doesn't shock your conscience, you have none.
garage mahal said...
Still haven't got laid yet Meth?
That's too bad buddy.
Yeah, sure. Whatever you say minute-man.
You can snark all you want over there (at Reason/Hit&Run) about conservatives, make vile jokes about Palin, rant on and on about Bush & Cheney, as long as you throw in a line about "and keep the government's hands off my pot!"
Oh, please. Sorry, but that's just plain ignorant. Maybe you thought were pulling off a funny line, but if so...FAIL. The primary focus of Reason is on economics, and their defense of the free market and small government is miles more thoughtful and well-articulated than most avowedly right-wing blogs. They are also, shockingly, rather more consistent. Small government means small government, not just less welfare. Small government means you don't put millions of people in prison for vices no worse than alcohol. Small government means you don't tell women what to do with their pregnancies, regardless of your own moral convictions. Small government means the reach of regulation is reduced, even against politically attractive targets.
I don't always agree with them, but that stereotype is risible.
"John, I can envision a scenario where a liberal with a conscience outed Weigs because of the integrity issue. Not saying that's what happened, but it could have."
If that is the case, then don't do it anonomously. Have the stones to say "yeah Dave I leaked them because what you wrote was terrible".
Ole Harry sufaces again with his usual raft of shit--Listen harry--lets review the bidding here--you said you had 9 patents--well I and several other looked up the patents available at the patent office and there was only ONE patent in the name of Harry D House--and he was from Tulsa--you been in Tulsa Harry?
You have my email address via google as I pointed out to you when you first let your mouth overload your ass.
Click on my name here and it will take you to your destination.
Look forward to your email--let me know when you mail it.
You are an idiot. How can possibly condone the cops kicking in a door and terrorizing people? Also, they are absolutely a menace to officer safety. The biggest protection an officer has is his badge. No one wants to turn a drug case into a captial offense by killing cop.
Well reasoned opening…so IF Osama’s in the apartment the Millicents need to announce themselves so he can prepare the suicide vest? My point being, is NO they are NOT an absolute menace to officer safety, they CAN be.
But, if someon kicks down my door, I can tell you I am going to assume they are there to do me harm and I will shoot them, as any home owner should. Further, cops are usually so poorly trained that they often shoot each other in these raids. That is what happened in Atlanta a few years ago when they shot and killed an elderly woman who was the vicim of a false warrent.
Which is it John, the cops shoot themselves or the little old ladies? Can’t make two arguments in one sentence.
Lastly, talk to anyone with any military experience and ask them what the most dangerous thing you can do in the infantry. And they will tell you clearing a house. Going into a house with someone inside it meaning to do you harm is absoulutely nuts. The military would never do it. They would call in indirect fire or they would give the person a chance to come out. But they would only as a last option go in after them. The cops in contrast charge in like rampaging buffalos. It is dangerous for them and everyone around them.
Really, don’t watch a lot of TV new, do you…all that house-clearing in Iraq, BY THE MILITARY…..
I gave you links to several cases were innocent people died in thise raids. Use google yourself and see. Even one is too many. And for every person killed there are hundreds of cases where children are terrorized and pets needlessly killed. If something like the film of the Missouri raid doesn't shock your conscience, you have none.
Yes you did, but you gave no CONTEXT…in 25 years and 50,000 No Knocks, about 26-27 people have been killed…in the same period of time 1,200 people died in “Hot Pursuits”, which one is the greater public safety issue? I believe as many children have drowned in 5 gallon paint containers as have died in No Knocks. IN CONTEXT, No Knocks are not the problem you and Balko want them to be.
Plus the use of No Knocks is NOT a great definition of “militarized” is it? As to no conscience I was shocked at the My Lai Massacre…didn’t mean I became opposed to the US Army. Basically you got a LOT of anecdotes, but a paucity of data.
The whole fucked up thing about this is that if Weigel had been blowing kisses at conservatives in emails, we wouldn't even be talking about this. Or questioning his motives. Would you? I highly doubt it.
So what?
If Weigel had been blowing kisses at conservatives, he would most likely have been kicked off of JournoList. Or never invited. This was a list he wanted to be on. He really, really wanted to belong.
The Weigel + JournoList scandal plays into the storyline that journalism in general, and the Washington Post in particular is lacking in integrity.
The WaPo ought to take a position -- and defend it -- on whether or not its journalists should participate in the liberal JournoList scheme. I still find it stunning that they employ Ezra Klein in any capacity, if they care about their integrity at all
The whole fucked up thing about this is that if Weigel had been blowing kisses at conservatives in emails, we wouldn't even be talking about this. Or questioning his motives. Would you? I highly doubt it.
Garage, is it because actual argument with other people is such a consistently disappointing experience for you that you have to invent straw-man positions and impute to me and others? That's sad, if true. Perhaps a more non-verbal hobby would suit you better. Words, thoughts, ideas...not your strength.
I never questioned Weigel's motives. I just think he lacks judgment. There is no reason to take his insights seriously. He's a kid. If he was blowing kisses to conservatives, that would make him no different from a lot of young journos who become intellectually captured by the people they're supposed to cover. His lack of credibility preceded these revelations. It's actually kind of cheap in my mind that the Post would need this kind of embarrassment to recognize that Weigel was not a good fit for this job. They're reacting to bad PR rather than the pursuit of good journalism.
I put innermost thoughts in print all the time.
What's the point of innermost thoughts otherwise?
I have no outermost thoughts at all.
@garage, who wrote...
And I take it everyone here is right on board with the little tattle tale liberal who leaked the emails to Matt Drudge?
Speaking for myself, I'm glad the mysterious journolister leaked the Weigel posts. Just as I'm glad (on a much, much bigger scale) that Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers.
Further, I wouldn't consider either Ellsberg or the mysterious jlister a "tattle tale." Rather, I'd consider them a source.
This is kind of like worrying what Steve Philips thinks about baseball. These so-called journalists are totally discredited and should be ignored like the cockroaches that they are.
The only thing worse than a journalist is a lawyer.
Post a Comment