I didn't "push[] the plastic-device story," I genuinely thought I saw something, something that wasn't a "story" anywhere else -- I took my own freeze-frame photograph. Within 5 minutes, I looked more closely in the surrounding frames and decided it wasn't there and said so. That's all my post was. So what the hell is George Packer talking about?
Shame on you, George Packer! That is truly sleazy! You are so eager to push your little theory that you have lost sight of ethics and fairness. Packer writes:
The problem isn’t lack of education—it’s that of a self-isolating political subculture gone rancid.Look in a mirror, man. Look in a damn mirror, loser.
ADDED: What Packer seems to have done is to have adopted another blogger's summary of what a lot of bloggers, including me, have done over the course of the election season. That other blogger paid no attention to my year of balanced blogging, under an explicit vow of cruel neutrality. And Packer, I bet, did not perform an independent check to figure out what my blog is really like. It is this failure, even more than the failure to link to the particular post he purported to describe, that is really a failure of ethics. What absurd irony that he behaved like this to reach the conclusion that the other side of the blogophere is "self-isolating" and "rancid"!
Packer, I demand an abject confession of your self-isolation and rancidity.
ADDED: Thanks to Instapundit for linking. There's also a separate post called "I got so mad at George Packer last night."
Posts
228 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 228 of 228Ann,
Am I too late to call you an idiot? I hope not.
You're an idiot.
You actually wrote "You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
You've apparently listened to too many of Governor Palin's interviews.
Next time when you're dreaming up bizarre smears against Senator Obama's integrity try not to defend it with nonsensical sentences. Much like Governor Palin when talking, you seem to write English words, you just don't seem to be writing in the English language.
And have fun November 5th. I know I will -- laughing at 'tards like you. Because socialism starts January 20th when Obama's going to take all your money and send you away to a concentration camp. You know, Obama the scary centrist Democrat who voted for FISA and said he'd consider off-shore oil drilling. Sounds like Karl Marx to me!
Um, Dear Dr;
It seems to me that in dismissing Jon Swift's most excellent blog, you may possibly have missed the fact - as have many others - that he's a satirist.
This statement in the header may be a clue.
"I am a reasonable conservative who likes to write about politics and culture. Since the media is biased I get all my news from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Jay Leno monologues."
It's therefore clear why a New Yorker author would be familiar with his work, while his work might be less familiar to you.
In essence, like many other wags and jape artists of the Left, he carves out a niche by presenting himself as a typical, if somewhat thoughtful Conservative blogger.
He's been a little challenged of late; after all, the premise of the art is to perform an artful reducto ad absurdem. All too often these days, the intended target tries to evade the satirist by reducing themselves to absurdity first.
It's perhaps arguable that you were merely collateral damage. However, you did squeal most delightfully and in doing so, proved that you have no visible sense of humor about being the subject of humor. Even mistakenly.
Libel? For being archly dismissed in the New Yorker? My dear women, better writers than you, myself and Jon Swift combined have been utterly ignored by the New Yorker.
But You Have Been Mentioned in Dispatches. And from your viewpoint, they met Mae West's single criteria for good publicity: They spelled your name correctly.
For this very thing alone, you should be humbly grateful to Jon - though I'm morally certain he would much prefer you continued on as you have.
Some debate may exist as to whether satirists are blessed with genius or a special form of character defect. I personally maintain a cruel neutrality on the topic.
However, I do think it timely of him to remind us of the standards one once could expect of trolls, sneaking into a blog to oh-so-reasonably make comments designed to make the blog owner explode entertainingly.
Would that my blog were so artfully afflicted. :P
So if I understand correctly - people who are rabidly anti-Obama are so in part because he can't come up with an American birth certificate?
How about this: http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/10/obama_mccain_us_citizens.html
Or does every nay-sayer need to look at it personally? And if this is so, name another politician that has taken the time to show his official birth certificate to individual Joe Six Packs?
As for Andrew Sullivan asking to see evidence of Trig Palin's birth, I suspect that he would accept a news organization's word of having seen some sort of typical notice of his birth. But has anyone seen one? I for one don't care about any aspect of his birth. But then again, I am not a journalist. Sullivan is. Can't we all agree that it should be the job of the media to investigate? Sullivan is rabid against Palin, more so than usual, but hey, she's running for Vice President.
dah_sab:
It is you who is an imbecile. If you'd ever read this blog you'd know that Ann Althouse long ago pretty much made up her mind to vote for Obama — but it is retard attacks from the left like yours that sometimes make her think about revisiting that decision. So keep it up — and lose her vote.
Since I'm already in that camp, I hope you do.
Ann, it'd be a lot easier to take you seriously, maybe even sympathize with you, if you didn't immediately launch into "shithead," "prick," etc. when responding to one of your critics. Take a deep breath and count to ten, for crying out loud.
Nice try, but your own comments on the blog post in question show that you were, in fact, promoting a theory (aka "pushing") that Obama was using a plastic device.
These two comments were posted a day after the initial post:
------------
Ann Althouse said...
Look, it's entirely possible that he has a very small device that completely fits within his ear canal. I say there is no visible external device, but some of the video shows that it seems that he is being prompted. Why not concede that it is possible?
Ann Althouse said...
It's not like the possibility that the moon is made of green cheese. It's a technological aid that we know is feasible and its usefulness is apparent. Why wouldn't people do things that are feasible and useful?
-------------
Hysterics aside, what Packer wrote is a reasonable take-away from your post. You claimed Obama might be getting coached via a technological aid (aka "plastic device").
Your theory may have evolved from the initial plastic device which your self-taken photo to a hypothetical device that is "feasible" and "useful."
The fundamental point remains the same. Packer's summary is fair. What's next?
I've read the original post and all the commments. Here's my unbiased opinion...
Ms. Althouse: It's true, Packer erred in not linking to your post. But he (and Jon Swift) was right to say you "pushed" the theory of the earpiece.
You respond: "I didn't push it, because I was simulblogging and making observations in real time and I immediately changed my mind. Where is the pushing, the promotion of something? It's not there. Period."
How about this sentence you wrote towards the end of the original post: "You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Sounds like you were still "pushing" and "promoting" the earpiece theory to me.
Just admit you made a mistake, and promise to never pander to the right (in your effort to be "balanced" again.
I'm gonna guess that Ms. Ahouse was at some point an enthusiastic supporter of that whole Iraq thing. (Maybe she still is.) I'm also gonna guess that Mr. Packer, who made his bones with an amazing book on pre- and post-war Iraq, was aware of Ms. A's comfy chair-derived opinions on Iraq and of her outsized blogger street cred. (It may also be that the often echo-y, Cheney memo reverb that rattles around this site on most days was a little galling to an in-theater guy like him.)
So I'm gonna take a stab at what happened here. (I could research it, I guess, but since that's not what's done around here, here goes...) George went off on the "device" post because he saw the same unserious knee-jerk typing that he read in this space when he was ensconced in the cozy confines of the green zone. What we have here, I therefore submit, is a delayed reaction, of sorts. Or is it called transference? Little help, psychologists?
So, no, George shouldna got mad at Ann for her wacky little post. But he's probably been itching to call her (and plenty others) out for a while now. Frankly, can't say I blame 'im.
(BTW, I figured I'd do just a little research. Googled "Ann Althouse" and "Iraq" and got a post from this site that is titled as follows:
"The Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win and America loses."
It's a Bush quote of which Ms. AH seemed to approve.
Mystery solved?)
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Don't run from your Rumsfeld Zen, Prof. Althouse. This statement leaves the door open, and some of the little minions in this thread STILL BELIEVE there was something in his ear. Of course, they don't believe that bumbling Bush had any assistance. No, it must be the Univ. of Chicago (a place where you couldn't dream of teaching) law prof, the one who Laurence Tribe called incandescently brilliant, the one that Cass Sunstein is awed by, that needs help.
Just can't get past that skin, can you minions?
Your "neutrality" is like the "fair and balanced" of Fox News.
When you feed on the same muck as the other right-wing nutjobs, why whine when someone calls you on it?
The New Yorker is home to some of the best reporting and writing to be found anywhere. That it is only number 87 in circulation is another sign of the dumbing-down of America.
Honestly, I think you're thrilled to have your name appear in the New Yorker and your hysterics are one more way to draw attention to yourself.
George Packer has few peers when writing about foreign affairs and politics. He's a REAL writer, even publishing books. That you accuse him of "substandard ethics" is hilarious and pathetic.
What's next for you? Making the case for William Ayers as the ghost-writer of the Obama books? Laying out the argument that Ashley Todd is an Obama operative, paid handsomely for her hoax of the hoax?
Here's a way to stop "pushing" a false story... change the TITLE from "{I doubt that] Obama wore an earpiece " to "Boy was I wrong about Obama wearing an earpiece, I really feel like a dope". Or, you can keep sowing seeds of doubt...
I know, I know, everyone should read every element of every one of your posts, and your responses to every comment. But you put something out there, that "nobody" else had, and you were wrong. Own it. I wish the New Yorker would link to my blog too.. but for something worthier than this.
Looks to me like Packer called you out for what you are. Good on him, and shame on you.
Jesus, what a bunch of creeps! Did someone raise the sludge-gate or something?
I just wandered in here through a link on Jon Swift's little blog and I must say this is quite a lively, if uncivil, discussion. I really can't see what Jon has done to deserve such abuse.
doug said..."Ann, it'd be a lot easier to take you seriously, maybe even sympathize with you, if..."
What makes you think I want your sympathy? I intend to challenge. Get it?
rotus said..."I just wandered in here through a link on Jon Swift's little blog and I must say this is quite a lively, if uncivil, discussion. I really can't see what Jon has done to deserve such abuse."
So, presumably, you admit that he deserves abuse, just not such abuse. Fine. I hope he learned that if he attacks me, I may respond with overwhelming force. That's the way it goes.
i really feel sorry for anyone that makes the mistake of getting a law degree at Wisconsin, because if this is the kind of education they're getting about the only thing they'd be qualified for is a job in the Bush Justice Dept. (which thankfully will be cleaned out soon)
My site doesn't get nearly as much traffic as yours, but wow, you're really pathetic.
Hey! Spooked is retarded!
Anyone else wonder if this trickle-in isn't just one guy constantly changing profiles?
Seems to me you did, at the very least, pay way more attention to that crazy Ayers/Dreams of My Father conspiracy theory than it deserved. Moreover, you didn't even dismiss it as ridiculous. So I think it's perfectly fair for Mr. Swift to lump you in with the other nutty conservative bloggers, and for Packer to slam you.
tray:
I say bullshit. The theory that Ayers might have ghost-written the Obama book is not inherently ridiculous and thus is worth considering without instantly dismissing the idea. Even so, Ann wrote about the theory in only a single posting, where she termed it “a strange notion” and “Ayers-o-mania gone wild.”
It's worth noting, once again, that Ann is generally an Obama supporter and, as she's already declared, will almost certainly vote for the man. Thus, the idea that anybody who questions Obama or his past in any way is deserving of being “lump[ed] … in with the other nutty conservative bloggers,” and thus being “slam[med]” is just typically over-the-top behavior by Obama's legions of rabid defenders.
I think the following quote pretty much sealed the deal on your lunacy:
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
My god, woman, there are decaffeinated brands that taste almost as good as the regular kinds!
Why do you lie, Carl? There is nothing sillier than drinking decaf coffee or tea, except perhaps decaf soda.
Why would you drink coffee without caffeine? It would be like snorting coke made from decocainized coca leaves. Literally, what would be the point? Stop the heresy, you annoy me. ;>
Meanwhile, Professor, I will once again remind you that these are the sort of turds you are casting your vote with. It's not too late to change your mind! "While the lamp holds out to burn, the vilest sinner may return..."
I mean, how dare you think you saw something!
The arrogance of Ms. Althouse, claiming that she never read Mr. Swift's (funny, well-researched, well-written, decidedly non-Althousian) post, is truly stunning. Then again, if I were in her position, I'd avoid looking at any criticism of myself, too.
You should vote for McCain, Althouse. Stay on the wrong side of history where you belong.
Thinking that you saw an earpiece feeding Obama lines in a debate says a great deal about you, Ms. Althouse. Since you are a law professor at a good school, I and most knowledgeable persons would assume that you were verbally fluent. But when you saw a former editor of the Harvard Law Review and former professor at the University of Chicago law school speaking deliberately, you imagined a plastic glint from his ear and jumped to a ridiculous conclusion. And couldn't wait to publish it. You revealed your prejudicial mind.
I was diagnosed with Herpes and HIV/AIDS for a long time,and I've had some variants of this Herpes and HIV/AIDS.This has brought me a lot of trouble, on many levels, especially with my partners, and this has given me a lot of self-consciousness.25 years of suffering outbreaks is a long time, I've had depression and I've felt the rejection of many people, who are suffering from it know what I'm talking about.As you know, pharmacological medicine does not provide any adequate solution to eradicate this diseases, it only mitigates the symptoms until the next outbreak.However, about a month ago I discovered some useful information that helped me in a few weeks to make myHerpes and HIV VIRUS disappear naturally after taking DR James herbal mix medicine .Today I am grateful to Doctor James herbal mix medicine that has given me back a normal life.Today I can say that: I am a new person, or rather, I am back to being a person without complexes because of this silent and complex hell that is herpes.If you don't suffer from herpes, well risky you are, but if you suffer it I invite you to contact this genuine powerful herbal healer called Dr james. Hiv/AIDS is a Deadly disease that cannot be cured by drugs or injections by US doctors, but the best way to fight against HIV/AIDS is to take natural herbal remedies, I read about DR JAMES HERBAL MIX MEDICINE, the great herbalist who cures people of HIV virus with his powerful herbal medicine. I contacted him to find out how he could help me and he told me never to be afraid that he would help me with the natural herbs medicine! After 2 days of contacting him he told me the medicine is ready and he sent it to me via DHL COURIER SERVICE and it got me in 3 days! I used the medication as he prescribed for me (MORNING and EVENING) and was cured! It's really like a dream, but I'm so happy! For people suffering from the following diseases,Diabetes, cancer,Pcos, hypothyroidism, Herpes, COPD, HIV, arthritis, Hpv, infections, liver disease, autoimmune diseases, Parkinson's disease, Lupus and more should contact him for his herbal medicine, because I am a living witness and I was cured of HIV virus. and DR James medicine is legitimate and 100 percent works. I sent him what he asked for and he sent me his medication which I took for 21 days and today I am here with a negative result. When I went for the test, I was so happy after I took his herbal mix medicine.
CONTACT DR JAMES FOR A PERMANENT CURE
Email: drjamesherbalmix@gmail.com
Post a Comment