I ... stumbled across these comments in Ann Althouse's blog, regarding my skepticism of Sarah Palin's pregnancy stories. I deserve criticism on this and have aired it on this blog ... not because my doubts have been put to rest, but because I know I'm out on a limb and I know that means you take your fair share of whacks. But look at these comments, which Althouse engages with and certainly doesn't remove. I have a thick skin but really...Go to the link to see what he selected from the comments to quote.
This comes with the territory. Some of it is even a little funny. I'm not complaining. But it does bear noting that on a widely read conservative blog, this stuff is routine. I think that's part of the GOP's problem. I also think that Althouse's engagement in the comments section and failure to remove any of these remarks is eloquent."Althouse engages"... "Althouse's engagement"... hey! That reminds me of the time he gratuitously mocked me for writing a blog post letting people know I'd gotten engaged. A peek into Andrew's psyche? Tied to his obsession with Palin's womb? Think about it.
Anyway, as many of you readers have seen time and time again, I have a very high tolerance for vigorous/rough/nasty speech in the comments here. (Some of it is very pro-male homosexuality!)
I rarely delete, and there is no way that my failure to delete indicates approval. I do sometimes participate in the comments, and I have one comment (accidentally double posted) near the beginning of the thread in question. That comment of mine is a response to a commenter (Loafing Oaf) who asks:
How come we often see Althouse commenting on Andrew Sullivan posts but we almost never see him posting replies? I like Andrew Sullivan, but I wish he'd engage in more back-and-forth between him and bloggers who disagree with him.(Guess that one got answered.)
Althouse tends to post replies when bloggers post criticism of her. In recent years, a lot of the bigshot political bloggers have decided to just ignore debating people who disagree with them.So I did engage with a commenter in that thread. I answered a specific question that was addressed to me, and that I happened to find interesting. What I don't do — and what Sullivan is wrong to infer — is monitor the hundreds of comments that come in every day. I don't systematically keep track of anything. Sometimes I read haphazardly, and I am a very busy person... a very busy person who is committed to free speech and to creating a place where people with different opinions can talk with/at each other.
Now, Sullivan is upset/annoyed that some homophobic things show up in the threads here, as if it says something about my blog. He doesn't have comments, but I'll bet if he did, he'd collect plenty of homophobic crap at his place too. Probably even more than shows up here. Maybe that's one reason he doesn't have comments. But I've chosen to open my place to comments, and I have a strong free speech policy.
And let me add that my writing on this blog has never included anything homophobic, that I have a long record of supporting gay rights, and that many of the commenters who hang out here here are gay men. There is no way that I am cuing readers to be homophobic, and I think people who care about free speech and vigorous debate should be careful not to impute such things to me.
ADDED: And check out the lame piling-on by the local blogger for the Isthmus, Kenneth Burns:
... Andrew Sullivan... quotes vile anti-gay comments on the blog of Ann Althouse, the Robert W. & Irma M. Arthur-Bascom Professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School. Althouse is teaching on the Madison campus this fall.Indeed, Althouse has been teaching on the Madison campus since 1984.
These slurs appear quite literally under Althouse's name. If her policy is not to delete comments, that's her prerogative. But what purpose is served by leaving them up, other than to humilate gays like Sullivan and me and further curdle an already dismal political discourse? Is this prominent Madisonian proud to have these people as readers?The purpose is free speech and vigorous debate.
AND: No one emailed me to point out offensive comments and request that I consider deleting them. I wasn't aware of any of them until I read Sullivan's post this morning. I did get email the other day asking me to delete some nonsense about Glenn Beck. (I didn't delete.) I might delete some truly vile things about gay people. I've deleted comments that contain the n-word. Try emailing me!
ALSO: Boy, a link from Sullivan — who has huge traffic — brings very few readers over here. I would like them to see what the real context is. Of course, a link from the Isthmus blog brings absolutely nothing. As expected.
পোস্টগুলি
২৯৯টি মন্তব্য:
299 এর 1 – থেকে 200 আরও নতুন» সবচেয়ে নতুন»People who don't allow comments on their own blogs shouldn't be complaining about the comments left on the blogs of those who do.
The comments cited are as homophobic as his posts are heterophobic or misogynistic.
Let me get this straight.
Sullivan calls Palin a fraud because she faked the birth of her Downs Syndrome baby.
Commenters respond by calling Sullivan a fudge-packer.
Sullivan gets upset for being called names.
Isn't that classic passive-aggressive behavior?
If people quote the story about Sully in the Village Voice that was written by someone from the LEFT to take down Andrew Sullivan because he claimed to be a conservative, does that make them homophobic or, like other things in our culture, are you only *allowed* to use terms that you *own*?
The purpose is free speech and vigorous debate.
Many people are not emotionally or intellectually equipped to act on principle and so have a hard time recognizing what acting on principle looks like.
(the other kev)
I stopped reading Sullivan years ago, and won't give him the traffic, so let me ask: does he still not publish comments on his blog, just cite the most ass-kissing ones? That's his prerogative, but if he doesn't allow comments to be printed, he really has no place criticizing Althouse.
I've read Althouse comments for years. And based on the comments, I infer the following about Althouse:
-She loves Gays. Sullivan, and Palin
-She hates Gays, Sullivan, Palin
-She hates women
-She likes women
-She hates herself
-She likes herself
BTW, Sully doesn't have open comments. Like most egomaniacs, he can dish it out - but he can't take it.
He's embracing the homophobia to deflect attention away from his creepiness.
But in his defense, he does put his own name on his creepiness, which is a lot more than I can say for creepy Althouse commenters (myself included).
But enough about Andrew Sullivan. When will Levi Johnston complain about his treatment in the Althouse comments? He has a thick skin, but really... People might get the idea that he isn't a real hetero redneck.
Althouse,
No one really thinks you agree with all your comments. Cherry picking a comment you don't like, and blaming your critique for THAT instead of responding to their criticism at all, is a common way for jerks to deal with arguments they know they lose.
Sullivan admits he's being a total kook. He's 'going out on a limb' with no evidence, to make an extremely harsh, ugly, sexual, and nasty attack. He's doing it because he disagrees with Palin's politics. He thinks being extremely nasty and unfair is ok in that case.
He won't ever give a fair defense for that. He'll just point out random stuff, like some random nugget from your comments section that half the time is a moby anyway.
What I love is that he uses 'conservative' as an epithet. He dismisses your views on that basis.
you're not 'pro-torture' or 'conservative'. You just aren't a hard core partisan, and the cowards on both sides think that is relevant.
Kenneth Burns: If her policy is not to delete comments, that's her prerogative. But what purpose is served by leaving them up, other than to humilate gays like Sullivan and me and further curdle an already dismal political discourse?
Dude, look at how you spelled "humiliate."
Anything a commenter here does pales in comparison to what you're doing to yourself.
Ann, they don't like your blog. They're creating a phony PC shitstorm and dragging UW into it to get UW to shut you down.
Who's Andrew Sullivan? *chirp*
People who fret about commenters strike me the way that those who would complain about what bloggers choose to write about. Honestly, reasonable persons filter out nonsense and focus on the issues. When one sees foolishness just pass it by.
As if my comment name didn't give it away...I am gay. I am a gay man, a University of Wisconsin Law student, and former student of Ann Althouse. Do I hate homophobic remarks? Of course. I don't care if it's in the hallway of my school, on State Street, or on Prof. Althouse's blog; I find them at best tasteless and at worst despicable. However, when I read comments on this blog I would never assume Althouse was endorsing them, even without knowledge of her support for issues like gay marriage. Similarly, I don't think the law school is endorsing Don't Ask/Don't Tell when they allow (perhaps reluctantly) military recruiters, interviewers that will not hire me because I am gay, to interview in my school.
My comments on this blog are infrequent. However, I've never felt like this blog wasn't a place where I had the right to say what I wanted. Are my comments often challenged? Nearly every time. But that's part of why I choose to comment. I am annoyed by many of the comments on this blog, homophobia aside. However, my annoyance doesn't stem at all from the belief that Althouse is endorsing such views or that she hasn't censored things that I disagree with or that offend me.
Oh damn it!
I sooo want to work with this-
I know that means you take your fair share of whacks.
I'll add for anyone reading (Hi, Sully!) that Althouse leaves up very, very nasty comments directed at her. Routinely. I can't believe the stuff she leaves up as far as that goes.
She has the truly thick skin.
"But in his defense, he does put his own name on his creepiness, which is a lot more than I can say for creepy Althouse commenters (myself included)."
Stupid. Sullivan is hired by "Atlantic" to post under his own name. Pay me and get me some TV gigs and I'll do the same.
If he started an anonymous blog, no one would read it. Like Frank Rich or David Frum - he gets attention because of who is and where he writes - not for the quality of his writing.
A very high brow criticism indeed Andrew.The banning of the free expression of opinions that the homosexual male lifestyle is less the a perfect way to live is a goal already attained in Canada and Europe. We Americans will still cling to our free speech, but we apologise for any offense to you and your high brow husband.
And bashing Sullivan for being a pervert creep is NOT homophobia. Bashing gays in general, or gays you know nothing about, over some false stereotype, is absolutely bigotted.
But Andrew Sullivan is disgusting. We know about what that guy has done in his life. He not only uses drugs and put up that 'milky loads' advertisement (one of the most disgusting things on the internet, and something no one should seek out for laughs), but he uses connections to get out of criminal convictions, and spreads disease.
He's a bad person. Gay or straight. He pretends to be on a high horse and has preached so often about the irresponsibility and corruption he happily engages in. It's no surprise he bashes Althouse for not deleting ugly comments, when he's ultimately setting up a smokescreen for his own much uglier comments.
He's interesting because he's still in the Atlantic and MSNBC will call him a conservative. He knows he's a complete fraud.
Are are we really supposed to take an emotionally unstable, English bare-back riding, pot-head seriously?
The gay community's idea of entertainment is ridiculing straights. So, fuck them is they don't like it in return.
The bigotry biz is a scam. People who think that "gay marriage" is a farcical contradiction in terms aren't bigots. They're just sane.
The left's continuing attempt to fashion any disagreement as bigotry... fuck them!
What issues will the bigot hunters find next so that they can indulge their sanctimony?
Althouse leaves up extremely harsh comments about herself. If she deleted any comments that bashed Sullivan, she could be attacked for coddling a weakling.
It's ridiculous to assert there's a meaning there. She just doesn't delete comments like that.
Who's anti-gay? I'm gay. But I don't see any reason not to mock Sullivan's heterophobia.
And by the way, that fucker doesn't only discriminate against the straights. If you're a fat or fem faggot, Andy won't squeeze your milky loads with his raw muscle glutes. It's true - at least that's what he said on his barebackcity.com profile.
And let me add that my writing on this blog has never including anything homophobic, that I have a long record of supporting gay rights...
This is what is known as wrestling with pigs...with the usual results.
Sullivan has become a waste of carbon, trumpeting rumors that TMZ would be embarrassed to float. The "anti-gay" slur is the only card he has left.
You've been in Madison too long. The correct response to "You're homophobic!" is not to whine that some of your best friends are gay. It's to smile, nod, and note that again, Sullivan has responded to an argument with ad-hominem rant.
Do better.
(Adding "sack up, ya big baby" is only for when you want to pile on.)
WV: Chskista (Che-quoting Latin American skiers?)
While there are bloggers who delete opposing points of view, Althouse has never been one of them.
He not only uses drugs and put up that 'milky loads' advertisement...
Confucious say: That's where cowmats come in handy.
FLS - for once you actually admitted reality. Now you can go back to cognitive dissonance mode.
I really wish Titus would comment on every Sullivan thread. He could share his thoughts about "milky loads" and "strong glutes".
"Some of my best commentors are gay".
Talk about lameness. The easiest way to get a comment deleted by the divine Ms. Althouse is to criticize her directly--especially if that criticism includes calling her a conservative. I know that from experience.
On the other hand if you want to spread the most vile Aryan Nation Eugenicist nonsense, this is the place to come. Cedarford is a practically revered institution. I have never seen Ann offer the weakest criticism of his anti-Semitic, racist and homophobic nonsense. Yet she is perfectly willing to call me an asshole just because I disagree with her interpretation of a political ad.
I have a thick skin but really...
Awww, poor Andy. Sounds like some of those comments made his mascara run.
Will the real Sullivan please stand up.
Sullivan gives Obama a pass on gays in the military and then gets bent out of shape about homophobic comments on a blog.
It’s really impossible to follow Sullivan.
Frederer - puhleese. Ann will not delete comments critical of her. I know because I've posted huge loads of them. *snark*
While there are bloggers who delete opposing points of view, Althouse has never been one of them.
Bullshit, she has deleted mine. She is not as dedicated to free speech as she pretends.
The purpose is free speech and vigorous debate.
Yay !!!!!!!
Lotta people say they're in favor of this, not so many really are.
See also: Barack Obama
Frederson,
When a liberal pretends to be a white supremacist, they are following a well documented technique known as 'mobying'. Why should Althouse engage that level of troll?
She's never posted on why the holocaust is wrong, and I missed her post about how eating rat poison is a bad idea. that doesn't mean she can be accused of supporting those views. Some crap is so obviously wrong that it's just patronizing to explain it.
Yet she is perfectly willing to call me an asshole just because I am one.
Fixed.
Sullivan goes after the nasty comments, and ignores the better ones. Makes him look better, by making Althouse look worse. Also saves him energy (hey, he's green!); it's much easier to repeat a nasty criticism as if to say this is the best the adversary can offer, as if the original point is unassailable.
This isn't behavior restricted to Sullivan. To some extent, we all do this: we judge the other side by its worst components. It's more natural for us to respond to inciteful criticism than insightful criticism.
wv: commo - what a serious-minded communist call himself to distinguish from the more amateurish "commie"
The most disturbing aspect of all this is the growing chorus to censor and delete-a sentiment which runs all the way to the top.
Frederson,
I think you're lying about having your comments deleted. You come across as totally insane. If Althouse really did delete something you said, it was probably absolutely awful. I've seen the stuff she leaves up... it's very, very harsh sometimes.
Can you quote the comment that was deleted?
Fixed.
Well, it wouldn't hurt so bad if she would at least once call Cedarford or you an asshole too!
No problem with Obama saying gays aren’t important enough to be is on his “plate” .. but comments on a blog?
Well.. its axis of evil Althouse aint it?
Lem - Sullivan "gets bent out of shape".
That would be impossible. At least according to the girls at The Vault.
Now you know what I find most upsetting about his post? He quoted one of my comments and I didnt' get a tag!
That's why Althouse is the bestest! She at least gives credit.
Seriously, for a man who has such an obsession over Palin's birth canal, its a bit rich to get in a frenzy over some colorful commentary.
Bullshit, she has deleted mine.
Freddy,
You got off easy. I would have banned you for being a tiresome liberal bore who only spouts the party line.
It's very tiring to read that absence of criticism is the same as support.
As vortices go, this is a mild one, in part because no one takes Andrew Sullivan seriously.
Can you quote the comment that was deleted?
Of course not moron, it was deleted. Her lame excuse for deleting it was I used bad language in it. Read some of Titus' posts and tell me, what possible language could I have used that was beyond the pale?
Although I am sure words to the effect of "Ann Althouse is a conservative" is the extremely foul language that got the post deleted.
I'm withholding my judgment on this until I hear what Andy Williams thinks.
Just for the record, in Althouse's dictionary, the following words fall under the category of "gratuitous mocking": "Ten days of emailing ... and she was ready."
O tempora o mores o brother
Sullivan: But look at these comments, which Althouse engages with and certainly doesn't remove. I have a thick skin but really...
Dude, you basically prostituted yourself to the Obama administration so you wouldn't have to worry about some legal problems. If you are concerned about what other people think of you, you've done more damage to yourself than anything someone here could say.
People who don't allow comments on their own blogs shouldn't be complaining about the comments left on the blogs of those who do.
This right here. Andrew Sullivan is too unsure of his own positions, and obviously cannot handle differing viewpoints, so he doesn't provide a mechanism for leaving comments.
He's a coward.
When a liberal pretends to be a white supremacist, they are following a well documented technique known as 'mobying'.
Wow, if this is true, then Cedarford should get a "Moby of the decade" if not "of the Century" award as he has been on this blog as long as I have and not once broken character.
I might add that he once implicitly threatened to kill me and even that did not raise an objection from our free speech loving host.
... I used bad language in it. Read some of Titus' posts and tell me...
Does Titus use bad language? Graphic, yes, but bad? I don't think "loaves" is bad language.
It's very tiring to read that absence of criticism is the same as support.
As vortices go, this is a mild one, in part because no one takes Andrew Sullivan seriously.
Amen Madison Man.
Freder-
I much admire you taking him on-as it is said.
Beth too for that matter.
Thank you both.
I would have banned you for being a tiresome liberal bore who only spouts the party line.
I don't spout anyone's party line.
frederson,
You're clearly lying. Lots of people call Althouse a conservative on here. Althouse actually brings comments on Sullivan's blog over here that say that.
You really think that's what happened?
Yes or no: did you use a racial slur? Did you make a threat?
You didn't have anything deleted, did you? If you did, you'd remember exactly what was said. I had a commented deleted elsewhere, and I recall what it was. If this happens enough to you that you don't even know what it was about, that is an indication that you are a really awful person.
what did your comment say?
No, Frederson, if a fake racist is a moby, that's amateur hour.
The good mobies are a lot more subtle than that.
You keep making grandiose claims with no evidence. You can't even remember what your deleted comment was about! But you're insane with rage enough about it to go on and on for hours. You really don't remember what you said?
Hmmm. I am calling you a liar.
For a big tent conservative I think its Sullivan that’s in a pool of phobias.
freder-
I'm reading your comments in reverse order.
I guess I would say that not everyone is perfect and that their positions on a certain issue-and abilities to let it roll fluctuate and evolve over time.
I greatly admire Althouse's efforts at whatever the hell of moderation is.
[My English is going to the shit for various reasons-I'm off.]
Freder Frederson: The easiest way to get a comment deleted by the divine Ms. Althouse is to criticize her directly--especially if that criticism includes calling her a conservative. I know that from experience.
Dude, this entire post is about criticism of Althouse. Althouse is literally posting them herself for all her readers to see.
Yes or no: did you use a racial slur? Did you make a threat?
I have never used a racial slur or made a threat against anyone on this or any other blog. Obviously you have not been reading this blog long enough to know that I never use racial slurs or threaten anyone.
As I said it was a while ago and it was a personal insult against Ann--most likely in the context of torture policy.
Frederson - "As I said it was a while ago and it was a personal insult against Ann--most likely in the context of torture policy"
Torture as in "sweet mother of god, it's torture reading this guy's posts?"
At this point, all one can do is laugh. Laugh out loud and laugh heartily at Little Miss Sullivan's near maudlin indignation at being commented on in another blog. Seriously, what does he expect was going to happen, that people would stand around and nod in affirmation to his lunacy? Why do you suppose he doesn't want to set up a comments section at his blog, because he feels that he would end up being mired in defending his idiotic positions on a constant basis. Nevermind the fact that he gets emails in either support or derision at his never-ended cluelessness on a myriad of subjects, but that he feels haughty enough to do something called dissent of the day, where he plucks an one email and posts it based on his musings and the other emails go into the dust bin of the internet.
Hey Andrew, stop whining and be a man for once. You spend more time bitching like a little kid about who said mean things about instead of actually proving your idiocy. You want to know why you get homosexual goofs on you about what you write? It's because you've taken a position of superiority in pretended to speak for a multitude of people that you think share the same views as you do. There may be some, but they are just as mentally vacuous as you are. That's why you get goofed on and that's why I especially enjoy goofing on you. You deserve it for the tripe you pass off as meaningful and deep thinking when in reality it's mired in conspiratorial nonsense.
This may be my first comment ever on one of your Sullivan posts.
Why do you even bother with him? He is uninteresting and has not had an original idea or thought in years.
Homosexuals want to have it both ways (is that a homophobic pun?): straights (an intentionally insulting term) are to take the homosexual agenda, including the oxymoronic homosexual marriage, seriously, because homosexuals are no longer marginal and must not be treated as such.
But when heterosexuals dare criticize homosexual marriage or, god forbid, make fun of it, that's homophobic. Why? Because homosexuals are marginal, oppressed and discriminated against and therefore must not be mocked. They must be protected from the normal give and take.
Hypocrites.
Freder, earlier you used plural forms to refer to your lost comment(s) and now you're using singular.
Is that it? One comment in all the time you've commented here was deleted?
If there's every a case where the exception proves the rule this is it.
Dude, this entire post is about criticism of Althouse. Althouse is literally posting them herself for all her readers to see.
Dude, Ann is such a narcissist, she thinks she is "cruelly neutral" about such important topics as torture by the U.S. government when she is obviously not. She gets all bent out of shape because she thinks she isn't conservative or doesn't display a conservative bias in her blog when she obviously does.
During the purges you could get shot for not clapping long and hard enough for the dear leader, Stalin.
I just hope Althouse won't be labeled a "White Supremacist " because she doesn't censor her comments.
Although I am sure words to the effect of "Ann Althouse is a conservative" is the extremely foul language that got the post deleted.
People make that comment with various wording every single day on this blog.
Their comments are not deleted.
Cedarford is a practically revered institution. I have never seen Ann offer the weakest criticism of his anti-Semitic, racist and homophobic nonsense.
Your obession with Cedarford is about as bad as Sully's over Palin's birth canal. Hey Freder try this when you see a Cedarford post. Pretend that Cedarford is a Muslim cause when you really come down to it, neither one's position of Joooos and homosexuals are really that far apart. (Cedar is more moderate) Considering how often you come riding Saladin's horse in defense of the religion of pieces it should make his comments more palatable for you.
Andrew Sullivan's increasing use of ad hominem attacks, along with his swerve to the political left, has made him a mirror image of his arch rival Michelangelo Signorile. Perhaps the only difference between them is that Sullivan is far more willing to appeal to his readers' pity about his HIV status, immigration status, and sexual preference.
As a self-styled public intellectual, his editorial persona is that of a real schnorrer; a graceless, whinging lout. (I sometimes wonder if his unrelenting negativity relates to his being British -- they aren't the most optimistic people in the world.)
Other comments here about Sullivan's unwillingness to brook free speech in his blog are on point. He fancies his blog to be a conversation, but it's not. Comments are only posted if they make him look good. If his "Dissent of the Day" didn't give him the patina of a broad-minded individual, he wouldn't post those genteel little squibs at all.
Is he really trying to bring an administrative shitstorm on Ann Althouse? Who knows. If Sullivan gets called on it, he's sure to deny it. His M.O. is well known and getting more tired by the day.
I think he should go back to England and spend his remaining years teaching English composition to freshmen at a second-rate university. He's pretty much jumped the shark as a blogger.
I just thought of this.
Since Andy believes Sarah is Trig's mother, does that make Andy a "BIRTHER"?
Sullivan is an absolute POS. His weird and disgusting obsession with Sarah Palin's child deserves the most scorn possible.
Scorn against Sullivan is almost certainly going to involve some people mocking his sexual choices, escpecially his ad about "raw glutes".
I boycott The Atlantic completely, not just Sullivan. I did peek at the Burns' blog, the quoted comments are pretty mild as anti-homosexual comments go. I agree that Sulllivan is just using this as a "look a shiny coin" distraction from his own idiocy.
Althouse,
Do you recall deleting Frederson's comments? I'm curious if he's really been deleted for merely saying you're a conservative, which is his repeated assertion.
OK, I'm not curious about that. He's obviously lying and knows he either has never been deleted or he was deleted for something else. But I'm still curious.
@AJ. It took me a while to figure out that BIRTHER wasn't shorthand for the Sullivan obsession. I read the wrong blogs.
googled schnorrer
Sullivan and Althouse differ on how to deal with free speech.
Alhouse prefers to confront it (either herself commenting or sane commenters confronting the hate speech) and hope for the best.. affecting opinion thru an exchange.
Where as Sullivan prefers that it all be swept under the rug (pretend its not there) under the guise of all things “tolerance”.
Of course I side with Alhouse and not that pot smoking nut Sullivan ;)
Henry:
That is pretty funny that you had always assumed the term was the clinical diagnosis of Sullivan for his unique subset of PDS dealing with Palin's youngest kid.
I truly did not even think of the irony of the term 'birther' til my last post.
lem, I may not care that Sullivan uses drugs, but I sure do care that he uses connections to get out of sure-fire convictions. He's a sleaze. He's an example of government corruption. That's why he defends the administration... he's part of the inner circle of criminals.
But what purpose is served by leaving them up, other than to humilate gays like Sullivan and me and further curdle an already dismal political discourse?
Why is some random dude who doesn’t even visit this blog “humiliated” by comments quite obviously directed at Andrew Sullivan himself because of specific things he has written that are insane? Lame. Some people just need to grow up.
OK I'm breaking radio silence-
Can I just say that as a dyslexic-this-
"Cruel Neutrality"
drove me insane for months...
If Sullivan had any guts, he would publish the trackback to this Althouse post from his original.
He can dish it out but he can't take it.
The Althouse comments speak for themselves, at least Sully linked to them. But hey, Sullivan's Palin obsession speaks for itself too. And he is obsessed with this whole Trig Truther nonsense.
Are there conservatives and republicans obsessed with red herrings? Sure there are. I am not buying the Obama Birther theories. But Sullivan likes to portray himself as a serious commentator and then posts these stupid "Sarah Palin did not birth Trig links" months later with sly comments from himself like "I don't know, just asking questions..." Right. He is still stinging from the rebuke he got from The Atlantic over this during the election.
People make fun of Andrew not so much because he is gay (although some people are homophobic) but because it is fun to make fun of Andrew Sullivan. And Sullivan wants to promote this, becuase I think he likes firing up the controversy and ginning up page hits. But for some reason Sarah Palin drives him crazy. It is obvious.
As for Sarah Palin, I doubt she will be the GOP nominee. Not in 2012. But I look forward to her being around, if only to drive Andrew a little bit more bat shit crazy.
My theory on Sullivan’s obsession with his belief that a Palin faked a pregnancy to cover up for her child is the result of a Vulcan mind meld he had with a daytime television soap addict.
Poor Andrew cannot tell the difference btwg his political addiction and that of his now host Days of our Lives.
(To be read in the voice of Edward G. Robinson.)
Anyone don't respond to my posts is ricpicphobic, see?!
Oh yes, you are a very busy person! And very important!
But you bragged recently about how well you can handle the hundreds of emails you claim to get everyday. And you have mocked others, like Jeffrey Rosen, who claimed busyness as the reason he did not respond with immediacy to whatever you posted about him.
And why not be honest: you definitely delete comments. And you definitiely weigh in on things.
The fact is that you have created a nasty vipers nest here. And you call it your "community." And then you distance yourself from it whenever anyone takes a close look at the nasty stink that is your "community of commenters."
Man up, Althouse. Oh right, you just command others to do that--and never do it yourself.
fred, I think Palin will have a huge advantage in a crowded primary.
People are going to go out of their way to vote for her. I am sure people will also go out of their way to vote against her, and there's a lot of time for her to look awful or wonderful before we vote, but I think she's got a tremendous advantage.
Sadly, the middle vote for pretty people they 'feel good' about. I think Palin can tap into that when running against Obama. I also think a lot of republicans want to send a message to the beltway. And then there's the people who want to vote for Palin because she makes people like sullivan act like assholes.
I'm still waiting to see who runs against her.
Kev asked: I stopped reading Sullivan years ago, and won't give him the traffic, so let me ask: does he still not publish comments on his blog, just cite the most ass-kissing ones?
Sullivan posts a "Dissent of the Day" nearly every day. Some of them are very effective critiques of him, his thinking, and/or his tone. He published quite a bit of reader criticism regarding his interest in the false pregnancy rumors.
Here's a recent example: According to Sullivan, quite a few readers took issue with this post, and he published several of their responses.
So I guess it's homophobic of people to call Sullivan a heterophobe? We're just supposed to shut up about his fertility obsession, and pretend it makes sense. uh huh.
Sullivan is a malformed pottle of pleuritic eel feculence.
Slim Jim,
She said she could handle hundreds of emails by reading the first line of them.
Yeah, she probably deletes death threats and racial slurs when she sees them or gets emails about it.
'She weighs in on stuff' != she agrees with every comment.
sullivan saw a really accurate criticism of his awful behavior, and was nonresponsive to it. he found something ugly because he either typed it or searched for it, and it's irrelevant. Sullivan is a criminal; he writes things favorable to a government that cancels his legal problems; he writes horrible and untrue things about Palin. His 'defense' is pathetic, and you're very mistaken to take it seriously.
I ... stumbled across these comments
Ok, I'll bite. What does that ellipsis up there ↑ stand for?
" was carefully combing Althouse comments for anything damaging that I could use as absolute proof of the degree of depravity of the salon she keeps when I "
or
"was trying out a pair of new high heels on the dunes of Cape Cod smoking a doobie and reading comments to an Althouse post about me on my iPod when"
or
"suddenly got up whilst reading comments to Althouse not realizing some prankster had tied together my shoelaces when"
Oh, I give up.
The fact is that you have created a nasty vipers nest here. And you call it your "community." And then you distance yourself from it whenever anyone takes a close look at the nasty stink that is your "community of commenters."
Amen. This passive-aggressive behavior about comments is pure bunk. These aren't just random commenters but some of her regulars who revel in how nasty and bigoted they can be. While at times this place can be extremely interesting, more often and not we get vitrol that might make Hot Air blush.
Freder...It is a buzz word lately to call anyone who defends their positions publicly a "Narcissist". You would be helped by doing a study of the real narcissism personality disorder. The easiest quick definition of a narcissist personality is "the exact opposite of Ann Althouse". A true narcissist is unable to show empathy because they are frightened people hiding inside fake actors skills to be seen as something that they are not, but this excellent act is used to control another who is a supplier of narcissist's act by reacting to the con job as they are supposed to react or else. The second the target of a narcissist has a free thought of their own and expresses opposition to the on going charade, the narcissist will cut them off and attack them to destroy them in a cruel way no matter how much that person has done for them before. The narcissist then moves on to a new target and a new act. Althouse uses a quick wit and strong arguments, but she has never cut off anyone or cruelly attacked someone with false storylines about them. Then again there is the case of Andrew Sullivan.
invisible man,
Reality is that people are passionate about this stuff, and they argue a lot.
Yeah, a lot of mobies and crazies come in and try to drag the discussion away with hateful comments, but I guarantee you could not build a better community yourself.
Reality isn't convenient. People will either be silenced or some will be dissapointing.
All the anger and harshness in this thread is people bashing althouse. Why are they even here? you are the ugliness you were looking for
Althouse and Sullivan should collaborate on a post titled "Bill Ayers ghost impregnated Bristol Palin".
On the topic of Sully and homosexuality, I loved this post by Mark Steyn from The Corner:
Yet More Nothing To See Here [Mark Steyn]
A couple of months back in this space, I made a sporting offer to Excitable Andrew Sullivan:
I'd be happy to take him for falafel at my favorite restaurant in Amsterdam in 2025. And afterwards he can buy me a drink at his favorite gay bar. If he can find one.
We may have to hurry:
Amsterdam Verliest Meest Populaire Homo-Hotel
What's that? Don't speak Dutch? No problem:
Amsterdam Loses Most Popular Homo-Hotel
Now why would that be?
Rest here
Chip, the ellipsis was not inserted by Sullivan. It's an Althouse edit, skipping over "also."
Sullivan started his post by citing a blogger's effort to "round up the reaction to Mary Cheney's pregnancy among readers of the Free Republic."
Awwww, come on Ann! Take some pride in your Althouse Hillbillies! You are not feeding them their daily diet of red meat for nuttin'!
Andy is important because...?
He has a blog on The Atlantic?
I'm not sure why we should pay attention to someone who called in favors to avoid being deported.
Anyhoo, it all goes toward making my dream dinner all the more interesting. Althouse (with Meade, of course), Paglia, and Sullivan.
Very few liberals ever advance into uncomfortable territory so it is no wonder that little traffic would come from Sullivan. His obsessions of Palin and torture suggest some very real problems that I hope he is getting some help with.
Althouse, as you know, very people actually believe in unrestricted free speech. This includes the Congress and the Supreme Court. You are a rare exception.
Althouse and Sullivan should collaborate on a post titled "Bill Ayers ghost impregnated Bristol Palin".
Hah! Good one, GM!
traditionalguy, that is a pretty interesting explanation of that personality order. I agree Ann Althouse is no narcissist. Ann is gracious and it takes quite a lot to fire her up. And when she does get fired up, it is justified. I mean, Sullivan called this a torture blog? How high was he that day?
I do not care about Andrew being gay. But it is funny how he is obviously smitten with Levi Johnson and loves dishin the shit on Palin. So since he dishes out the personal, people dish it right back at him.
Despite his love the beagle, Sullivan has the temperment of a minature schnauzer. The small psychotic rat-dog hybrid that bark as if the world was ending when dried leaves blow by.
ricpic...You are one of my favorite commenters because you mix good humour with great insights. The day of Sullivan's and NOW's and ACORNS cheap victimology cons may be losing their power as we are all now faced with becoming real victims of the world's current economic manipulations.
The new Althouse film: My Dinner Wtih Andrew.
Ann films Sarah Palin and Andrew Sullivan at dinner. That would be special.
The only way that's funnier is if she gives birth in the Panama Canal Zone.
Thanks, tradguy. But Bissage, that tease, is still my favorite. What kind of nonsense is that, where he tells us there are things he's done that he's not proud of...and then fails to deliver on the details?!
Althouse has a point that until Sullivan opens up his blog to comments he hardly has any standing whatsoever to criticize someone else's comment section. I believe he is the only Atlantic blogger with comments turned off.
Sullivan should have gone for the more humorous comments which would have included mine, I'm sure. The comments seem more anti-Sullivan than anti-gay.
People mock characteristics of others. I'm mocked because of my extreme handsomeness, intellect and sexual prowess. I don't see that mocking as attacks on all good-looking, smart, studs. Sullivan's jealous because studs like me can make Sarah Palin happy and he can't.
"Boy, a link from Sullivan — who has huge traffic — brings very few readers over here. I would like them to see what the real context is."
Well, that's just tough, isn't it?
As you would say to any other blogger who made a similar complaint: stop whining.
As to Cedarford, he has his role as a fount of information on many topics; however he will suddenly raise his Dr Strangelove's saluting arm occaisionally when he smells a Jew, or what is incomprehensible to him, a Jew lover, and then he turns out reams of disinformation for a while until his arm comes back down. I actually like Cedarford's personality, but he appears to be commited to his outdated and dangerous belief system. He is probably hooked by his pride, like John Birchers are hooked by their pride, in knowing secret inside stuff that no one else knows, like freemason stuff out of Ken Brown's books on the Knights Templar Order.
Althouse has a point that until Sullivan opens up his blog to comments he hardly has any standing whatsoever to criticize someone else's comment section. I believe he is the only Atlantic blogger with comments turned off.
Even Garage is on the right on this one ;)
What? Bissage is your favorite, ricpic?
Aww. Not that he's not a great guy...just..aww.
"Cedarford is a practically revered institution. I have never seen Ann offer the weakest criticism of his anti-Semitic, racist and homophobic nonsense."
You know what irks me about this sort of comment? Cedarford doesn't hurl epithets. He presents purported facts and puts together arguments. No one takes the trouble to refute his facts, they just gasp and point and call him an anti-Semite. It's a big bore and I'm not deleting any of that. If C is so wrong, say why he's wrong. Address his substantive arguments instead of name-calling. He's not name-calling. His critics are.
Althouse: Boy, a link from Sullivan — who has huge traffic — brings very few readers over here. I would like them to see what the real context is.
He doesn't allow comments, he doesn't encourage critical thinking, few click on his links.
Some people want to be told what to think.
As for Freder, I don't remember ever deleting him, so if I did, I don't know why. Boring repetitiousness? Trying to make himself the whole subject of the thread and thereby ruining it?
I've known Cedarford on line for too long-.
What you suggest has been tried trust me.
It does not work.
His reputation proceeds him-and while you have sort of tamed him-he wasn't always so.
Oh, you thilly thavages! Now look what you've done! You've got Thullivan advocating thenthorthyip!
And no, that's not the WV.
Seriously, someone needs to give Sulivan the sage advice from Sergeant Hulka: "Lighten up, Francis!"
Boring repetitiousness? Trying to make himself the whole subject of the thread and thereby ruining it?
That's C-4 in a nutshell.
I agree with those who feel that this sort of faux outrage is the beginning attempts to silence bloggers that promote free speech; especially sites that allow criticism of "protected" groups; groups that include the current administration.
Free speech is the new hate-speech.
"Boring repetitiousness? Trying to make himself the whole subject of the thread and thereby ruining it?"
Lecturing on conservation of energy?
Breaking the world record for "you a law professor!" comments?
There is also the fact that here at Althouse there are way more respectful, eloquent dare I say brilliant commenters (like myself) that to point to a few bad apples misses the whole idea of a free marketplace if ideas.
My last comment hopefully because we are at a huge point of disagreement-
if anyone has earned-epithets and name calling it is that jackass.
My father was one of the first to arrive to liberate a camp-he will never return to Europe.
As an aside he rarely talks about it-he starts to and well forget it-but-what the hell one of the faults of him not talking about the -war experiences-
I have represented him online as being a veteran of three wars-which turned out to be false.
He went up to Chicago-at the age of 85-flew a biplane for a couple of minutes and had a heart attack.
In the hospital he told me he didn't get to Korea during the war-he went to Korea shortly after the end.
Anyways this Cedarford in essence calls my dad a liar every time almost.
I'll believe my dad's short attempts to convey what he went through over that C-4's rancid vichyssoise spewings any day-and which is allowed to foment here.
If we choose to hurl epithets at that-well I tell you plenty have tried the rational with him.
Althouse has a point that until Sullivan opens up his blog to comments he hardly has any standing whatsoever to criticize someone else's comment section.
Wow, garage made a sensible comment. Looks like the Mayans were a few years off on their prediction ;-)
And if Sullivan should offer you some curry, just say no!
Its not like we are in some stupid singing competition and Althouse is playing Simon Cowell delighting in bumping people off..
What’s that?
Althouse loves the show?
Never mind then.. I take it all back ;)
Wow, garage made a sensible comment. Looks like the Mayans were a few years off on their prediction ;-)
Going for a stealth tag. Sssshhh.
Has anyone followed the travails of Mark Steyn and the magasine that quoted a truism from his book. They were charged in three courts with offending Moslims in a system where the state prosecutor's office was in cahoots with the Sole Plaintiff in cases brought and was awarded any cash damages, and where there was no jury trial or even basic due process. Is that what the Marxists plan for the internet soon? That system was put into Canadian law for the same reasons Sullivan demands comment deletions.
It says something that when (if) Freder did have a comment deleted ... no one noticed.
I'll bet that Althouse does as many of us do and scrolls by Cedarford's long posts. But I agree with madawaskan. I've read a few that have been pretty nasty.
I wish I'd noticed him calling madawaskan's dad a liar though! That would have bothered me a lot.
It was you, Darcy. It was always you. Always...can I stop now?
Can I stop now?
Hee. Yeah. :)
This Sullivan link of a Bill O'Reilly Quote is funny:
Both you and Sarah Palin are good-looking women. I mean, you’re attractive, young — relatively young — women who other women can identify with.
Andrew does not open comments because he knows how much crap he will catch, although with out going all Little Green Footballs in deleting everything that he disagrees with, it would be good to have comments. Glenn Reynolds too. I stopped reading Commentaryevery often without its comments, it was just not as fun.
Lem... You are the stick that stirs the drink among the commenters.
Name-calling is child's play. It can be fun, but it can get ugly.
But it's silly to criticize the blog host if commenters choose to go down that path. She's not our mommy.
I am not Freder, I am Fred4Pres. There is a difference.
Ugh I did couch with the term "hopefully"...
That guy that went nuts and shot up the museum in Washington DC?
He did that at a late age.
Cedarford has made reference to the point that he has a ready answer for when he is asked if he has ever been-...on applications he has a clever way of getting around a certain question.
One of these days you might be damn glad that the epithet throwers were here as evidence of push back.
Lem is the Angostura bitters in the cocktail, it makes all the difference sometimes.
garage mahal said...
Going for a stealth tag. Sssshhh.
Tag? TAG?!!
Dude, why would you want a stupid little tag when she's already written an entire post having to do with instant garage mahal door karma?
madawaskan,
Sounds like Althouse and others are glad you're here now to push back against Cedarford's views... you're just being asked to take his arguments on in a logical way instead of just linking him to the guy who shot up a museum.
I don't even know what he's claiming... if he's claiming the holocaust didn't happen, then he's an asshole and I would also insult him. But the challenge issued to you is to take his arguments and respond in kind. That's asking for better pushback, in other words.
To comment anything sullivan writes about you have to e mail him. God knows what happens after that. But Sullivan to appear evenhanded about the things he writes, will publish "THE DISSENT OF THE DAY". It drives me crazy he does not allow comments. I don't expect any blogger with a decent following to monitor their comment section nor do i care if they read the comments posted on their site. I like to read the comments to gauge reaction to the issue at hand and how my thoughts correspond with others. Sullivan is a pompous ass and if he weren't gay, his site would generate far less interest than it does. Since Sullivan loves to trade off his image as a gay intellectual who is Catholic and Conservative (by his definition anyway) it gives him an air of intellectual unpredictability of someone who is both a victim and yet not a whiner when in fact that's all he does. His Palin obession is border line ocd on a subject that has less credibility than the birther movement.
death, stupid, garage mahal
I'm not sure that's such an honor, Meade
Sullivan reminds me of a crazed street person with a megaphone. The neighborhood would just be much more pleasant if his voice was no louder than the rest. I don't understand why Ann and others, knowing full well his unworthiness, keeps handing him the megaphone.
Just Lurking wrote
"But it's silly to criticize the blog host if commenters choose to go down that path."
By no means do I think that Ann should be considered responsible for the hateful things written on her blog but it is fair to point out that she does cultivate it. After all she for weeks advertised her blog as the place for immoderate speech. She also pushes topics that are designed to get her Althouse Hillbillies lathered up in a frenzy. Is it unfair of me to point out this obvious fact?
You guys have awaken my spirits.
I find many of Ann's commenters provide superior commentary to Sullivan's writing and they are only half as crazy.
death, stupid, garage mahal
I'm not sure that's such an honor, Meade
I'll take it.
I thought I was a redneck until I looked up the definition of homophobic. Guess now I'm bi-racially sexist.
Maybe thats bi-sexually racist.
I love how mention of the bitch's employment gets her all agitated. She knows that her "annoy the libs" act would get a great deal of negative attention from students and colleagues.
She's really living a double life.
Ann Althouse: The Larry Craig of the Internet
L E Lee...Getting lathered up in a frenzy is hard work. You are never any help in getting us red meat eaters to our frenzied climaxes. All you do is find fault and say mean things about us. Are you really that guy riding along and whispering into the Conqueror's ear during A Roman Triumph? And you a descendant of R E Lee.
And check out the lame piling-on by the local blogger for the Isthmus,..
That is a lame piling on over there. Almost a chilling call for censorship and investigation.
Once upon a time the Isthmus had a real writer of interest on their staff, who wrote under the pseudonym of Ursula (the original one not the subsequent fake one). Hell I was probably the only person ever to have a snailmail subscription in Switzerland.
I often get the impression that some Isthmus staffer comments here on a regular basis as one of those diehard leftist polemists.
Could it be that that someone besides Sullivan is just a wee bit jealous?
Ethan...That was a carefully crafted shot. Threatening a person's career based upon a false slander is not an honorable tactic. Are you a soldier in Sullivan's personal slime machine?
LOL, ethan. You think her employer and students don't know about her blog? She isn't hiding a thing.
Hint: Oh, holy crap - look! It's got her name all over it. ;-)
Silly.
Professor Althouse deleted me once.
(bursting into tears)
Ethan = paid Sullivan troll.
@madawaskan-I find Cedarford too complex to dismiss out of hand- he does add something to the mix. But as an admirer of yours, I would have spoken up too had I seen what you described here. Did this actually occur here a while ago or was it elsewhere?
wv: junta (honest to blog it said that)
ethan, you are not a gentleman.
Could it be that that someone besides Sullivan is just a wee bit jealous?
I forgot to add that Andrew Sullivan writes for The Atlantic, a magazine I've been pestering my wife to cancel for years now.
and that many of the commenters who hang out here here are gay men
Straight girls love 'em some gay men, but you know, the lesbians are representing on Althouse, too.
Professor Althouse deleted me once.
Me too
I'm Spartacus! ;-)
Good grief another Sullivan mention. Why not leave old pickle brain to smolder all alone?
(Overlooking the fact that he's about as conservative as a PETA member spraying a mink stole a toxic orange.)
I see many of the conservative commenters here jeer at Cedarford, repeatedly, for his "the JOOS are to blame" and similar excesses. I see no reason to engage him at all. He's nuts. That doesn't mean he isn't eloquent at times, it just means there's always a ludicrous, frothy rant waiting to happen. There's no onus on anyone to take that seriously or respond with logic.
ethan, how exactly does anyone lead a double life if that person's life, in class and online, is led under her own name? Pray tell.
LE Lee said:
She also pushes topics that are designed to get her Althouse Hillbillies lathered up in a frenzy. Is it unfair of me to point out this obvious fact?
You can point out whatever you like. And I can continue to think it's silly.
C'mon? Hillbillies? And I'm supposed to take you seriously?
I would also ask him what the purpose is of relating your exact title at the law school. To invite people to email them and demand your resignation or public shaming?
Hey, it is appropriately descriptive!
Sometimes I like defending Althouse: http://blog.unzipped.net/2009/10/if-andrew-sullivan-gets-to-question-trig-palins-maternity-people-get-to-call-him-a-crazy-fag.html
The Larry Craig of the Internet
Does anyone see a connection between the professor and anonymous restroom sex?
I see no reason to engage him at all. He's nuts.
I worked with a manager who was logical and reasonable in every way except if you challenged his belief that the universe was created in six literal days.
Just avoid the touchy subject, and co-existence is possible.
... my dream dinner all the more interesting. Althouse (with Meade, of course), Paglia, and Sullivan.
FOOD FIGHT!!
chickenlittle-
Thank you-of course that sentiment goes both ways-to you.
It has been across many blogs....he has refined himself over the years-the guy is not stupid.
I'm trying to fire up my memory banks-Richard Fernandez a blogger who I've never seen called stupid....
Anyways in the hey-day of that blog-there were many very intelligent commenters that tried to deal with C-4-in fact that nickname was derived from what was the result of a thread if you tried to "play with Cedarford."
She knows that her "annoy the libs" act would get a great deal of negative attention from students and colleagues.
She's really living a double life.
The hell?
It is funny that most of the conservative posters here seem to blithely wave off all of the vile quotes that Sullivan links to but if I write "Althouse Hillbillies" many of these same right wing Jethros get all lathered up about THAT!
Now I want an "Althouse Hillbilly" t-shirt.
Professor Althouse deleted me once.
Me too
I'm Spartacus! ;-)
And all this time I thought getting a tag meant you'd arrived.
Braggarts.
It is funny that most of the conservative posters here seem to blithely wave off all of the vile quotes that Sullivan links to but if I write "Althouse Hillbillies" many of these same right wing Jethros get all lathered up about THAT!
My Dad always told us we was from the hills.
Now I want an "Althouse Hillbilly" t-shirt.
Me too!
It's hard to say "isthmus" without lisping. What a coincidence.
And all this time I thought getting a tag meant you'd arrived.
Actually knox, getting an adjective is the real sign of having arrived, as explained by the one guy who won her hand and heart.
@garage: note the tags on that thread: :)
Sully should get a life. Don't let him threaten you with his "I'm so offended" pc stuff.
The unfortunate aspect of this so-called feud is that even after the Twerp is deported to England or to wherever, he'll probably have access to the net and thus continue to be granted a paycheck from his sugar honey / editor.
wv: heriac, yes I was, a great idea.
Freder Frederson was deleted at 11:07 AM on 12/27/06 in a thread where many comments by others were also deleted.
Althouse's comment after the deletions was "I delete for profanity and gratuitous abusiveness, generally. If you think it's because you're opinion is opposed to mine, you are an abysmally bad reader."
It is funny that most of the conservative posters here seem to blithely wave off all of the vile quotes that Sullivan links to but if I write "Althouse Hillbillies" many of these same right wing Jethros get all lathered up about THAT!
Despite all your efforts at race-baiting, L.E. Lee, I don't think I've ever seen anyone here get "all lathered up" about anything you write.
They've pointed out you're a clueless moron, and that your racist efforts to push your "Althouse Hillbilly" meme are tedious and dishonest, but none of them seem to get mad or upset about it.
Do you have any links to any particular instances where a commenter here actually got mad at you for what you said, as opposed to just pointing out and then dismissing your stupidity?
If the right wing commenters here are "Althouse Hillbillies", what are the resident left wing commenters called?
Let's pretend, for a second, that Andrew Sullivan isn't being completely unfair and dishonest about our hostess's behavior.
Let's pretend, for the sake of argument, that the Althouse comments are nothing but wall-to-wall homophobia of the sort one would expect to find at a Fred Phelps site.
In fact, let's pretend that even as we speak, every single person who ever read an Althouse post favorably is sitting at home in their PJs, feverishly typing homophobic remarks with one hand while thumping a Bible with the other.
None of that would change the fact that Andrew Sullivan is totally freakin' insane on the Palin baby issue. Even if everybody who disagreed with him was a homophobe, he would still be wrong.
So who gives a rat's patootie if the comments here are homophobic or not. It has nothing to do with the fact that Sullivan's a loon. Tell Andy not to try changing the subject.
"If the right wing commenters here are "Althouse Hillbillies", what are the resident left wing commenters called?"
The Smart People
Jason was deleted at 8:31 AM on 3/6/08.
Althouse's comment on the occasion of the deletion was "I had to censor Jason. Sorry. Find another way to make your point."
The Smart People
No really t-shirt worthy though.
Freder Frederson was deleted at 11:07 AM on 12/27/06 in a thread where many comments by others were also deleted.
Not that he holds a grudge or anything.
Triangle Man: I believe the post of Althouse historian is open (whatever happened to Ruth Anne?). You should apply.
... the resident left wing commenters called?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOSZwEwl_1Q
I actually know Andrew (kind of). We were both in Cambridge at the same time. He was incredibly arrogant then. I met him through friends and went to some of the same parties. He was handsome and much younger at the time. I was this skinny, shy, sheltered kid from the Midwest. While he was a Phd student. He loved being the "gay conservative". This was before the internets and The New Republic was a big deal.
Since then that time he moved to DC but we see each other every year in Ptown. I don't read his blog but I did have a couple of really enjoyable conversations with him over the past few years. We have both aged and in person he is much nicer and more humble than he was many years ago.
I don't read any other blogs but Althouse.
I know most of you find this hard to believe but I have been deleted many times as well. One time for using the word "felch".
Oh and I am gay.
"No really t-shirt worthy though."
Ok,
The Really Smart People.
(Sorry, that is the best I could come up with.)
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন