१६ फेब्रुवारी, २००८
Writing something nonobvious about Rush Limbaugh makes righties and lefties stupid.
So I wrote this post. And the lefty assumes I'm a righty, and the righty assumes I'm a lefty. Both lose the capacity to read, to think anything new, or to say anything interesting.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५५ टिप्पण्या:
Oh, come on, Tom apologized. Even Leiter thinks he's funny.
People are so emotional and wrapped up in their personal beleifs, that they have lost objectivity and the ability to think critically. Opinions are no longer informed, but purely emotional. It is identity politics, or as I call it personal identity politics.
Tom didn't apologize in any way that matters to me. I wanted him to understand what I wrote and why I was saying it. I don't like to get out my sledgehammer, and people who react to me obtusely like that are essentially saying that I need to spell it all out or they won't understand. I don't want to write like that, so that's it for them in my book.
I thought his response was lame. He followed the same pattern that seems standard on the internet. I.e. Don't respond to what the person wrote, write a response to what you thought (or wanted them) to write.
Given all the straw men being created I'm amazed there's any left for the cows.
And Chris go back and read his Tom's post, he didn't apologize at all. It was more of a "I'm sorry if you misread my post and were offended, etc"
With politics and political blogging being such a war zone these days, it becomes difficult to apologize or admit shortcomings, I think. It seems to me that there is a blogger's pecking order, and admitting error endagers your place in that order.
Ann is the Chauncey Gardener of teh intarwebs -- people hear in her words what they wish to hear.
In general though, if the lefties think you're a righty and vice versa, you might be ... a moderate.
Yeah, except Chauncey got all the love. I get the hate.
I get the hate.
Maybe you should start positioning yourself as the blogger of hope and change.
You and Jane Fonda. I think you're interested in both her and Rush (which doesn't mean approving) because you're trying to do the same thing -- draw attention. (What you're trying to draw attention to, however, is much less obvious. Onion rings and "cunt" are similar only on the most obvious level.) You haven't yet accepted that, like there's no such thing as bad publicity, if you get attention a lot of it is going to be negative.
The trouble is, when people get here -- their attention successfully drawn -- you then dazzle and confuse them. They can't place you, or penetrate the layers of what you're doing, and it drives them nuts. Rush is playing a role, and probably a lot of his listeners are taking that role more literally than he does. Fonda is just a garden-variety narcissist.
In other words, they try to love or hate you based on what they, in their simplicity, imagine you're saying. Because that's the model they know.
You don't get all the hate Mary.
Only hate is from others that may read infrequently and don't get you.
I, on the other hand absolutely "odor" you.
Now get on the vlog and show us some cleavage.
Today is another rejuvenation day for me fellow republicans.
Dropping the dogs off at daycare for "open gym" this afternoon.
Next up Bikram Yoga.
After that Pecs and tris at the gym. Massage with hot stones is next on the calendar. And finally a class on mediation.
Afterwards I pick up the dogs, go for a walk and will be taking a bath.
Not sure if I will be going out. A friend of mine is turning 35 and people are meeting up for drinks but not sure if I am interested.
Currently, I am not horny.
You really lead the world's most boring life, titus. You manage to make even sex sound dull.
I like my life Palladian but value your view, thanks for sharing.
Currently I am taking Gakic in order to intensify my workout. After my workout I will be taking creatine and leukic so my arms look especially big.
Wish me luck girls.
If I am in the mood I made take a littejaunt into the sauna at the gym to see what I am worth and for a little jerky jerky.
I have also decided that I will be beginning my 12 week cycle of the steroid winstrel beginning mid April. This should put me in a good position come the beginning of July when the season really kicks off.
July 4 week-Ptown
rest of July-weekends in Ptown
August-weekends on Fire Island and my annual pilgrimage to Oguinquit Maine.
Time is of the essence to be in ship shape for these events.
I don't like to get out my sledgehammer, and people who react to me obtusely like that are essentially saying that I need to spell it all out or they won't understand
[raises hand]
I was also guilty of misreading you, thinking you were hypocritically criticizing a style that is similar to your own. Just another lesson for me: read, reflect, and refigerate before reacting.
[and refrain from too much aliteration]
Ann says,
My point is that I don't think Rush is a social conservative, despite his emphasis on 3 "legs" to the conservative "stool.
Righty Smith says,
Having partially imbibed an adult beverage, as Rush would say, I can see in the cool light of evening that my post is pretty grumpy. It's just one grouchy right-wing flame, and I concede I really shouldn't do that.
Later he says,
Dear Professor Althouse. I found your post annoying, for the reasons explained above. I'm sorry I expressed myself rudely to that effect. In the future, if I find what you say annoying, I will try to say that without being rude about it.
Lefty Marcotte says,
It’s almost like Ann’s full of shit or something.
Later she says,
Brendan, the point is that “social conservative” means sexist fan of the patriarchy.
And
Althouse is being fundamentally dishonest with her making excuses for Limbaugh.
Interesting how both seem to miss the point yet one apologizes, though not in any way that matters to you, the other compares you to shit and defines your terms for you.
Ann,
For what it's worth to you (please don't tell), I think the blog would be stronger if you banned these idiots who try to hijack threads with their nonsensical cries for help (this means Maxine and Titus). At least Trooper York now-and-then throws in decent movie quotes.
If anyone ever drops one of those "sorry if you were too stupid to get it and were offended" apologies on me, I will reply in kind after accidentally breaking a 40 of Olde E over his/her head.
Marcotte's maliced-laced stupidity is quite stunning (I didn't bother with the other link, assuming it was in the same idiot's ballpark).
That Edwards would hire such a person is disturbing. That such a self-righteous hater as Marcotte would work for a guy who made his $$$ by cherry-picking damaged babies to exploit is, I don't even know. Edwards is worse than the worst CEO--he took without producing anything.
Yeah, except Chauncey got all the love. I get the hate.
I wouldn't be here reading every day if I didn't have a lot of love for the Althouse blog, and its cool and yes, lovable, author. Except perhaps for masochists, the love shows up in the SiteMeter, and occasionally here in the comments....
So where did the right wing mistake you for a lefty? What am I missing here?
Since Limbaugh became famous precious little has been written or said about him in the media that wasn't either for him or against him, and all that based mostly on pure partisan political considerations. So much so that now it's practically a reflexive thing that readers of an opinion piece about Limbaugh will try to divine which axe the writer is grinding. The way it is.
stephen snell wrote:
...a guy who made his $$$ by cherry-picking damaged babies to exploit is, I don't even know. Edwards is worse than the worst CEO--he took without producing anything.
Stephen, perhaps you should consider commenting only on subjects about which you know something. If that results in silence, so much the better.
Oh I see, all this is on some other blog.
I wondered how I could have missed such an exciting misunderstanding.
Without misunderstanding, there would be no agreement.
And there's Lautreamont
Who can understand why two lovers who idolised one another the night before, because of one word misinterpreted, split up, eastward one, west the other, goaded by hate, revenge, love and remorse, and never see each other again, both cloaked in lonely pride. This is a miracle renewed every day and is none the less miraculous for that.
I assumed that the post meant that Althouse admired Limbaugh's work in a performance art sort of way (not unlike her blog). Which is a sentiment she has expressed before.
Was I wrong?
I rather like Limbaugh's stuff when he's not going to war against John McCain...
At least Trooper York now-and-then throws in decent movie quotes.
"Why don't you try stickin jou head up jour ass – see if it fits."
(Scarface, 1983)
Writing something nonobvious about Rush Limbaugh makes righties and lefties stupid.
Yeah it does
I don't think righty mistook you for lefty. I think that he took you for an elitist academic who treated an obvious truth as if it were a nonobvious insight. It surely would be less insulting if he were just taking you for a lefty.
Paul Moore: It must be nice, to always think you know better, to always think you're the smartest person in the room.
Jane Craig: No. It's awful.
—"Broadcast News," 1987
Cyrus Pinkerton said...
stephen snell wrote:
...a guy who made his $$$ by cherry-picking damaged babies to exploit is, I don't even know. Edwards is worse than the worst CEO--he took without producing anything.
Stephen, perhaps you should consider commenting only on subjects about which you know something. If that results in silence, so much the better.
I think Stephen hit the nail on the head. He is only telling what everyone already knows. It is different than what some people perceive.
Trooper York said...
"Why don't you try stickin jou head up jour ass – see if it fits."
He Trooper, they have asshats at that clothing convention you are attending?
Middle Class Guy wrote:
I think Stephen hit the nail on the head. He is only telling what everyone already knows.
For the record, Stephen no longer owns the stupidest comment on this thread.
Cyrus Pinkerton said...
Middle Class Guy wrote:
I think Stephen hit the nail on the head. He is only telling what everyone already knows.
For the record, Stephen no longer owns the stupidest comment on this thread.
Aside fro your emotional tie to Edwards, what is so stupid about the truth?
Skeptical said..."I don't think righty mistook you for lefty. I think that he took you for an elitist academic who treated an obvious truth as if it were a nonobvious insight. It surely would be less insulting if he were just taking you for a lefty."
Prove it.
My take on the righty/lefty view of you by some is get over it Helen. I snapped my finger behind my head when I said that.
Why do you invest so much time and energy in thinking what others think of you?
Why should you care?
People are constantly harping about me on your blog and I don't give a shit.
Take a lesson from me Mary. I can be your role model.
I agree that Tom Smith should've also apologized for misinterpreting Ann; he seemed to understand her to be saying "Rush isn't so terrible," rather than "Rush really isn't much of a social conservative." (I read the apology as sincere, though it may have been incomplete. That is, I didn't read it as "sorry you're so thin-skinned." Others might disagree.) But I think his apology makes it clear that he understood that to be the message, and he did apologize for being rude. And Smith is right that it doesn't take much Rush at all to see that he's really not very socially conservative, and that that's been clear for years. And I think Smith does have lots of interesting things to say.
Middle Class Guy wrote:
Aside fro your emotional tie to Edwards...
A poor assumption...
what is so stupid about the truth?
Your mistake is in assuming that your babbling constitutes "truth." It doesn't. What you wrote is logically inconsistent and reflects a gross ignorance of Edwards' legal career. Perhaps you should follow the advice I gave Stephen and refrain from commenting when you don't know what you're talking about.
I thought it rather presumptious of you to demand he take his post back (down?), so looking at this from Smith's response:
... instead of exasperation at the cluelessness that its being taken as a revelation implies.
I think he's being ruder than his original post. Notice no mention of your political stance from him, however. He was probably so shocked any professor would 1) listen to Rush for a month, and 2) not say something negative, that he missed or ignored your point. His explanation about Rush's semi-hedonism doesn't match up with the original post, and he seems to be equating political social conservativism with a puritanical lifestyle, which is what the left usually does, to the right's disgust.
I'd hate to be Marcotte's boyfriend. Wonder what her patriarch did to her when she was younger.
Cyrus Pinkerton said...
Your mistake is in assuming that your babbling constitutes "truth." It doesn't. What you wrote is logically inconsistent and reflects a gross ignorance of Edwards' legal career. Perhaps you should follow the advice I gave Stephen and refrain from commenting when you don't know what you're talking about.
Ah, another one who lives in the sewer of insult. Babbling? Stupidest comment? Please explain what is logically inconsistent? Please explain John Edward’s sainted career as a trial lawyer? Perhaps you should learn manners and etiquette. You may even like yourself.
Middle Class Guy,
Your education is not my responsibility, fortunately. The record of John Edwards' legal career is readily available and I encourage you to read it before babbling about it in the future.
However, if you want to establish that you have something remotely intelligent to offer on this subject, why don't you address the 1997 product liability lawsuit against Sta-Rite? Feel free to share your opinion on any of the issues involved or on Edwards' performance in the case.
The ball is in your court, Middle Class Guy; let's see what you can do with it.
Limabughs social conservative positions are informed by the Constitution and not adherence to any particular religious ideology. That's why he confounds the left on these points; they think they have a lock on alleged personal freedom positions because they aren't "holey rollers" even when they bash individual libery in service to their collectivist vision of governance.
Don't you think Titus and Maxine are the same person?
"Don't you think Titus and Maxine are the same person?"
Possibly. What do others think? Share the evidence.
Well, this isn’t exactly evidence -- as Althouse well knows. But Maxine a while back announced his intent to develop a new persona and they do suspiciously show up one after the other as if they want readers to wonder and become intrigued.
And more importantly, they share an exceedingly rare trait in common. They’re the only two commenters at Althouse (I’ve noticed) who have started off innnocuous and have become increasingly intent on jumping Althouse’s train.
Tone.
That's the evidence.
And cadence.
Similar typos.
The oblique fetish as art form.
Insolent, demanding and bratty with Althouse.
Inappropriately familiar with Althouse.
Cunningly hostile.
Demand they be recognized as vital to the success of Althouse.
Militantly shallow.
Prone to too many multiple comment postings!
Bissage is vital to my success.
Awwwww, shucks!
[ * blushes * ]
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा