He says "Michelle Goldberg gets it." Fine, but did he get as far as this clip, where Michelle says something that makes me say, "You hear that, Andrew?"?
Goldberg went to Wasilla to report for The Nation during the campaign, and there she heard the wildest rumors but the one thing nearly everyone agreed about was: "Yes, we all know that Trig is her baby."
ADDED: I know Sullivan wants me to check out his list of "lies." I picked one to check out, that she said the only flag in her office was the Israeli flag. As Sullivan himself notes, she must have meant to say the only foreign flag, since she did also have an Alaskan and an American flag in her office. That's the sort of sloppy speaking that one would correct easily if it were pointed out at the time. Of course, I also have the state flag and the American flag. I mean, it would be pretty ridiculous for a state governor to only have a foreign flag! There isn't even a motivation to lie.
That there's no motivation here doesn't mean it's an "odd lie" — which is Sullivan's term. It means it's not a lie at all. What's odd is his definition of a lie. If I said I was just wearing jeans to a party, you wouldn't have exposed me as a liar if I turned up wearing a shirt and shoes as well. In fact, you'd sound like a dork — or, with good enough delivery, a comedian — if you said, "You liar. You said you were just wearing jeans!"
Calling something like this a lie marks you as someone who's centered not on finding out what is true, but on destroying someone. It doesn't motivate me to go through the rest of the long list systematically to see what each item is about, and it certainly doesn't make me want to look at the list and accept the conclusion that wow, Sarah Palin really is a terrible liar.
ADDED: Little Miss Attila is afraid to watch the diavlog, and naked Tom Maguire devises what would be a traffic-grabbing title, if anybody ever Googled that.
२१ नोव्हेंबर, २००९
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०५ टिप्पण्या:
Fine, but did he get as far as this clip, where Michelle says something that makes me say, "You hear that, Andrew?"?
Li'l Andy is somewhat... preoccupied, just now. ;)
This just proves that Althouse is PART OF THE CONSPIRACY!!!1!!!!
You claim to not like Palin and yet you defended her with considerable zeal. Coincidence!
On your blog you often defend women. Palin is a woman. Coincidence!
Ann Althouse has 11 letters. Sarah Palin has 10. 11 - 10 = 1. The One! Clearly this is a conspiracy to destroy Barack Obama, the man you obsessed over in your vitriolic filled ranting against the noble Ms. Goldberg! Coincidence!
Admit the truth Althouse. Trig is an alien reptilian baby mothered by Palin and fathered by space aliens! Tell us the truth!
Barack Obama has 11.
Oh dear, Eden.
What can this mean!?11!!
Quick! Get the charts!
Since it was alleged by David -- and confirmed -- a couple posts back that Obama is a reptile alien invader....
Get Sulivan on this quick.
"He says "Michelle Goldberg gets it."
Watching Althouse spin circles around Goldberg in that video and I'd agree, Michelle Goldberg certainly "got it" and got it good.
This has been the final nail in the coffin of Sully's judgement. I first started doubting him when he went ballistic over W's lack of support for SSM. Then I started really worrying when he flipped out over Romney's underwear. Hoever, when he went obsessive about Trig - I figured it was time to throw in the towel. He has well and truly lost it.
God knows, I'd never vote for Palin for President, or even dog catcher. I think that she should replace Oprah. Thats about all she's qualified for.
About the worst thing you can say about her in regards to politics is that her ability to "color" the truth lacks finesse. Her overall lack of experience means nothing...
Whenever I'm presented with Andrew Sullivan these days I find myself reflexively looking away in embarrassment, the way you would look away from a dirty alcoholic street person who was wagging his dick and pissing and laughing on a street-corner.
What does the Atlantic care about more, their reputation or pageviews? What does Sullivan have to do before whoever is in charge over there shakes their head sadly and finally pulls the plug on that unhinged drug-addled foreigner?
You know, maybe Andy has a crush on Palin and is in a panic over it.
JAL are you questioning Dear Leader?
This is very suspicious activity!
Are you now or have you ever been a Reptilian Alien from Space in League with Palin!!!!!11!!!
a dirty alcoholic street person who was wagging his dick and pissing and laughing on a street-corner.
You just described the theme for Sullivan's high school senior prom.
Oh my.
This guy has beclowned himself.
Again.
As someone else (far smarter than I) said, Goldberg certainly "got it" and got it good from Althouse.
On a side note, what can we do to be sure this guy's site goes dark more often? Maybe Althouse should release a book? That might be good for a week of gone-dark blogging.
(Althouse could eventually release two books and be eligible for a Nobel Peace Prize. However, she would have to write turgid prose like "The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a buzzer downstairs that didn't work, so that visitors had to call ahead from a payphone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws clamped around an empty beer bottle." I mean, that Sarah Palin can sure write.
Oh wait. That was Obama. Tolstoy!
"What's odd is his definition of a lie. If I said I was just wearing jeans to a party, you wouldn't have exposed me as a liar if I turned up wearing a shirt and shoes as well. In fact, you'd sound like a dork"
And it makes you sound like a lefty. I don't know how long the radical left has been using the term "lies" in this manner, but go to any lefty word-mill on the web and you'll see the term frequently. Nothing turns them on more than calling someone a "liar". Mistakes, misstatements, blunders, and simply unpopular ideas sound so much more sinister when labeled LIES. I suspect it has origins in the communist practice of denunciation.
I pretty much ignore any writing that begins with lists of "lies" or anyone who uses the word "lie" to refer to anything that isn't a deliberate untruth.
Lie: when a Republican misspeaks.
Misspeak: When a Democrat lies.
Dark Eden:
RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!
You have uncovered the truth & you will have to be destroyed.
miller...
um...
tin foil hat? It will protect me!
..
lol, newb
Althouse, don't I deserve a tag for this? See my post at 10:55 in this thread from a few days ago
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2009/11/i-hope-to-be-up-half-night-trying-to.html
where I used this same example of the flag "lie", and made the same point about Sullivan himself noting that she must have meant to say foreign flag. I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else, so I'm guessing that you read my post?
An old favorite re: Tin Foil Hat
Tin Foil Hat song
The only thing worse than a "liar" is a RACIST LIAR!!!!1
It is hardly news that you are unmotivated to check out all the documented falsehoods in Palin's book. You would only be motivated to do that if the book were written by a Democrat.
Your shallowness has become your defining feature, professor.
"You liar. You said you were just wearing jeans!"
"No. It was a Halloween party. I was dressed as a premature ejaculation.
I just came in my jeans."
Don't you recall that clever commenter telling that story recently?
And what Andrew refuses to acknowledge is that the more he pushes his conspiracy theories, the more he elevates Sarah Palin so that even moderate Democrats and sane liberals see her as "not that bad." He's only hurting his own cause and being incredibly self-destructive. The definition of insane.
"You would only be motivated to do that if the book were written by a Democrat."
When did I ever do that?
@Jon I really did just glance down at the list of lies and pick the first thing that jumped out at me. I don't mean to tag-deprive you.
You know, I'm kinda slow here, but I just figured this out: both Gore and Sullivan are crazy-obsessed, and I think for the same reason: they both had something they thought was theirs snatched away (unfairly!) by a trusted resource.
Gore thought the Vice-presidency was his, and it was snatched away by 400+ votes (and BUSHITLER).
Sullivan thought SSM was his and it was snatched away by BUSHITLER.
Both have suffered a severe, life-altering loss, and cannot seem to get on with their lives.
And instead, they have fixed upon a secondary object. In Gore's case, it's Katrina; in Sullivan's case, it's vagina.
So we can pity them for their unfounded obsessions but realize that they speak not from wisdom or even knowledge but simply from irrational feelings of loss and rejection.
There.
Can I be on bloggingheads.tv now? I could go up against Althouse.
I'm here all weeks. Don't forget to tip the waitress.
@althouse
Okay.
I picked one to check out, that she said the only flag in her office was the Israeli flag.
They just aren't serious people.
Michelle Goldberg is particularly juvenile and uninteresting - especially physically, but even moreso mentally.
She's read Rules For Radicals 25 times, that much is clear. As for what else she may have done at college besides consumer her roommates in order to increase her obesity, one may never discern.
Jabba the Hutt is truly envious.
This is what counts as serious journalists in their world.
I mean, it's Beverly Hills 90210 with that crowd. Even their controversies (I mean come on, flags???) are uninteresting and undamaging.
It's junior varsity gotcha journalism right out of high school.
It's going to be fun watching these people mope to work November 5, 2010 with that "what happened" look on their pancake-makeup-ed-fake-tea-drinking faces.
@Ann--
The working of your mind is a pleasure to observe.
At least Andrew has found some meaning in his life through his obsession with Palin. but it does seem by turns comic and deranged.
If anyone wants to deal with Sully, compile a list like this:
1. Sully lied about [insert summary] (explanation, cites)
2. Sully lied about [insert summary] (explanation, cites)
3. Sully lied about [insert summary] (explanation, cites)
And, so on. Simply saying you disagree with him doesn't work; simply ranting at him as most r/w bloggers do doesn't work. You have to show his audience how he's not credible.
For instance, here's an example of Andrew Sullivan lying about an objective, easily-understood fact: he claimed that the cert picture on BHO's site has been "vouched for by state authorities", when in fact they never did such a thing.
I realize that most people have been quite well trained to immediately dismiss any discussion of that issue, but the fact remains that Sully lied: he claimed that something had been "vouched for" when in fact on HI officials have done that, as they admit.
For the BHO fans, let me run through that again:
* Sully said HI officials "vouched for" the cert shown on BHO's site.
* HI officials admit that they haven't authenticated the cert shown on BHO's site.
At the first link, click Sully's name to see a list of my coverage of him; start your own list, or link to mine.
If Ms. Goldberg gets it, hopefully, it won't be from Andy because even she doesn't want what he's got to give.
I have been through some of his lists and there's a lot stuff like the above in it that waters down anything serious. He really destroyed his credibility on Sarah with the Trig Troofer manic identity change.
How about the Odd Lies of Andrew Sullivan? Like "I'm doing this not to attack Palin, but to expose the cynicism in the Republican Establishment."
OH YEAH RIGHT. Try attacking that establishment then and get your face out of Palin's womb, you sick fuck. Get help.
I find the Andrew/Trig thing truly bizarre. It's the first time I've really thought someone needed therapy. I don't throw out that typical net insult easily.
As a middle-aged guy with no kids and his siblings in England, does he just not understand about what women go through during pregnancy and infancy of a child? How inappropriate on the deepest levels his crusade really was? And so he projects his own machinations onto Sarah? His friends tried to warn him.
It's either that or womb/mommy issues - much like Levi has. Can you imagine dealing with this fireball as your almost mom-in-law when your real mom is in prison for drug dealing? How would that mess with your head and stir up resentments?
"If Ms. Goldberg gets it, hopefully, it won't be from Andy because even she doesn't want what he's got to give."
Sully took one look at Michelle Goldberg and decided AIDS was a much better deal.
Shudddddddeerrrrrr.
Florida, just leave.
Your comments are not welcomed or accepted.
Methinks you are a Moby here to stir up trouble.
miller,
As I was about to say, Sullivan might have a career as a climate "scientist."
"You know, maybe Andy has a crush on Palin and is in a panic over it."
Isn't it obvious that Andrew Sullivan is a latent heterosexual?
@Miller: "Methinks you are a Moby here to stir up trouble."
You don't get to decide who has free speech. You're clearly here because you support the idea that if you find speech you don't like, the best solution is to shut it down. To eliminate free speech.
You clearly can't tell when people are using the Alinsky rules against those who wield them so they get a taste of their own medicine.
So, go form your own blog and write there in your retarded obscurity. Then you can control who gets to say what.
Till then ... piss off.
Change a few nouns, and we're all set.
I don't truly pity Sullivan anymore. I just ignore him.
Me making fun of him here isn't really to give him attention - it's just to point out that anyone who thinks like he does is obviously crazy.
I'm not interesting speculation why he's crazy. Just as I don't speculate why Michele is unable to get from A to B without a detour to 8. I just say that both of them are unable to think clearly when it comes to certain things, and in both their cases it's a sign of mania, obsession, and general craziness.
I wonder though - do they spend their free time pushing grocery carts downtown, muttering under their breaths, and wearing old, grimy clothes? Because they're not that much different except in grooming.
Well, I'm certainly put in my place by a Moby.
Feel free to post your drivel.
I for one find that you're worth as much attention as Jeremy.
At least Jeremy's sincere. He's crazy, but he's sincere.
I don't know how long the radical left has been using the term "lies" in this manner, but go to any lefty word-mill on the web and you'll see the term frequently.
Palladian, you are so correct!
Ann, you again have done a great service by calling the left - and (sadly for such a talented writer) Sullivan in particular. The constant parsing, dishonest labeling and "depends on what the meaning of 'is', is" speaks of a congenital dishonesty and incapability of dealing with truth.
This basic dishonesty on the left is endemic - and that is just heartbreaking. It runs in the modern era from Lenin and communism to today's American left and that includes pretty much ALL of today's Democrat Party.
Here is the absolute Daily worst offender in the dishonest use of the word "lie" and (are you watching Floydster?) "falsehood".
Here is second place. A place of basic, never-ending dishonesty.
The American left is not constrained by a "need" for honesty and honest representation of truth and facts. That's because the true worldview of today's American left and it's minions in the Democrat Party is simply defined as:
whatever.
And finally, it is worth noting that the Ten Commandments - the bane of every leftist - does not state "thou shalt not lie" but rather, "not bear false witness". Which is a stronger term, not allowing for parsing or meaning , or questions of intent. Rather it means that the "witness" or one speaking, must give a full and accurate telling of the truth, not even allowing the possibility of a wrong impression to be left in the minds of the hearers.
Today such a standard would plainly cause spontaneous combustion in most of the American left.
Zachary Paul Site wrote: " And what Andrew refuses to acknowledge is that the more he pushes his conspiracy theories, the more he elevates Sarah Palin so that even moderate Democrats and sane liberals see her as "not that bad." He's only hurting his own cause and being incredibly self-destructive. The definition of insane. "
Hell, the fact Sullivan is so obsessed is one of the things that forces me to reconsider my opinon of Palin.
I was critcal of her on another thread and took my share of criticism. So be it. I also said I was buying her book and will read it. Partly to assure continuance of domestic bliss in this household, and partly to be fair about what I think of Palin. I did vote for McCain/Palin last fall.
I'll listen to her speak and watch her interviews as well. Why wouldn't I (or anyone else)...there is nothing to be afraid of in that.
Who knows, my mind can change between now and whenever she runs for office again. Hers might even change a bit as well. That is how we humans operate is it not?
Another so-called Palin "lie" from Sullivan ("Lie" XXV): "Palin lied when she claimed to be unaware of a turkey being slaughtered behind her during a filmed interview; in fact, the cameraman said she had picked the spot herself, while the slaughter was underway."
Of course, this is actually just an inconsistency between two witnesses, there is no proof that Palin is lying, and there are multiple plausible alternative explanations.
Perhaps the cameraman is just remembering wrong about the slaughter having been already underway when the shoot began.
Or perhaps it was underway, but there was no turkey being killed at the precise moment when she picked the spot, so she didn't realize it.
Or perhaps the cameraman is lying (this possibility is made more credible by the fact that he could easily have eliminated the turkey-killing from the shot by slightly altering the camera angle- the fact that he didn't suggests he was deliberately trying to embarass her).
Palin lied when she claimed to be unaware of a turkey being slaughtered behind her during a filmed interview; in fact, the cameraman said she had picked the spot herself, while the slaughter was underway."
Well, I can't think of anything more disqualifying for national office than lying about a turkey slaughter going on when being interviewed.
Geezus, it's impossible to parody this story.
Yes, Mr. Sullivan, we get it.
"What's odd is his definition of a lie."
His definition of a lie is a lie. He is a well documented liar and drama queen. The truth is not in him.
Trey
The psychological autopsy of Andrew Sullivan is done. His credibility is shattered (it should've been back when he was a Bush booster on Iraq and did a 180), he's destroyed himself trying to attack the ship Palin. This is now objective fact. What I want to know from Ann is: why do you continue to give this guy credibility by continuing to reference his lunacy like he's some authority? HE'S NOT! If you would simply ignore him, others will follow suit and soon he will be relegated to the oblivion he so well deserves.
Michelle Goldberg gets it.
Maybe. But I'd bet that Ann Althouse gets it far more frequently and at a far higher skill level.
Which one was smiling more, Michelle or Ann? I rest me case.
Jeez, have you noticed how white Atlantic columnists are? The masthead looks like a Palin book signing event.
Better get MSNBC on it, right quick.
What I especially LOVED about the diavlog was the growing awareness of Michele that she was in a cage match with a bear. She looked like someone who'd never been confronted cooly by an equal. She looked like her whole life was a series of arguments trumped using her ability to speak louder and more assertively, and Althouse devastated her on the facts and the principles. Michele retreated to sulking, whining, cries for sympathy, threats of leaving - where were her "scholarly" attributes? Missing in Action.
I'm no legal scholar or student, so I can only imagine how lively an Althouse class might be. Certainly no stale bromides there.
(I have the feeling that Althouse is most disappointed in people who won't stick up for themselves even when they argue points she agrees with.)
Ann Althouse has 11. Sarah Palin has 10. 11 + 10 = 21. Clearly we have here a conspiracy to take booze and the vote away from 18 year olds. Plus, 21 is greater than 19, a clear putdown of Louis Farrakhan. A shanda! The Althouse + Palin mishegoss must end!
err ... miller?
Gore thought the Vice-presidency was his, and it was snatched away by 400+ votes (and BUSHITLER).
I think youre LYING!!!11!!!!1
Gore thought the PRESIDENCY was his in 2000.
Liar.
See? I can do it too!
Why does the left always look for lies instead of positions, and matters of policy. Which they can then shred with great reason and compassion?
Instead of going after the definition of "only" (Israeli) flag go after *why* she has an Israeli (!) flag. What is her position on Israel? (Oh, and don't forget that some of the Lefties tried to portray her during the campaign as anti-semite because she is a "christianist" (WTHTI). And we all know how evil they are.)
Like Sullivan needs to have a psychosis to conclude Palin is a fruitcake who tells all sorts of tall tales. It's hard to nail down a particular lie with Palin because there is never a base of real truth to start with. It's all a load of total horseshit. The bridge, the pipeline, the plane, the cook, and on and on and on. Her last pregnancy WAS fucking strange. Sure, he writes about it constantly, but so do the same people writing about what he writes! Just as obsessive, in defense. This all can be explained!.
Althouse has 8. Meade has 5.
Barack Obama is almost 51.2307692 years old.
13 + 5 = 13
13 * 51.2307692 = 666
Uh oh.
Which is the worst misrepresentation, the most deliberate "lie?"
Palin failing to mention the standard US and Alaskan flags in her office when she mentioned the flag that wasn't standard that she put there herself? (Althouse's example of "I wore jeans" is an excellent one.)
Or the person deliberately making that inaccuracy into something that it wasn't?
Hillary relating the exciting little thrill of danger and the security procedures of her visit to Bosnia, mashing the trip together and getting details completely wrong?
Or the person claiming that it was all a deliberate and malicious lie?
And you know... I think there is probably a record of me saying at *least* once that John Kerry getting the time-line of his "Christmas in Cambodia" story all messed up wasn't evidence of anything because those are the exact sorts of things that people get confused about.
Saying that Palin *lied* about the flags in her office is itself a deliberate and malicious lie. It's not an attempt to be truthful, but as someone else said, it's an attempt to destroy that person by twisting facts.
And in the end lying really is a matter of intent.
I picked one to check out, that she said the only flag in her office was the Israeli flag. As Sullivan himself notes, she must have meant to say the only foreign flag, since she did also have an Alaskan and an American flag in her office. That's the sort of sloppy speaking that one would correct easily if it were pointed out at the time.
Why would any governor, or elected or appointed official of ANY branch of State or Federal Gov't fly ANY foreign flag in their office????
I have a problem with that. Be it some hispanic flying the Mexican flag, some jamoke of Chinese origin with a PRC Flag, a Christian Zionist like Palin with the "Special Friend's" flag, Obama with a Kenyan flag in the Oval Office....whatever..
"...in fact, she opposes all rights between gay spouses..."
Which is undoubtedly why, as governor, she vetoed a bill passed by the Alaska legislature, to deny benefits to the domestic partners of gay people working for the State.
See now... this slander of Palin is what a *lie* really looks like.
She doesn't pass judgment on gay individuals and has, when she could have signed a bill without taking personal responsibility since it was the "will" of the people, she didn't, but vetoed it because she felt that it was unconstitutional... but this doesn't count.
Instead of trying to be as factual and truthful as possible the motivation is to *lie* about Palin's views and her record concerning homosexuals and the legal rights of domestic partners who are gay.
"Gore thought the Vice-presidency was his, and it was snatched away by 400+ votes (and BUSHITLER)."
Oh lawdy.
I need to commence backpedaling furiously.
"I meant he WAS the Vice-president & THOUGHT he could just take over when Clinton left and so it was easy to confuse and..."
Oh the heck with that.
Looks like I made another mistake. That's like 2 in 40 years.
✡ ✡ ✡ ✡ ✡ ✡ ✡ ✡ ✡
(The flags were for C4 to help ease his mind.)
"Why would any governor, or elected or appointed official of ANY branch of State or Federal Gov't fly ANY foreign flag in their office????"
If it was the little "flag on a stick" that was in the back ground of one of the photos I saw of her office, using the word "fly" is excessively optimistic.
"I have a problem with that. Be it some hispanic flying the Mexican flag, some jamoke of Chinese origin with a PRC Flag, a Christian Zionist like Palin with the "Special Friend's" flag, Obama with a Kenyan flag in the Oval Office....whatever.."
I don't.
Because we flew Norwegian flags or Swedish flags (if one was not blessed enough to be Norwegian) in my home community all the time.
My gung-ho former-Marine uncle put up two tall and permanent flag poles in the middle of his yard so he could actually *fly* the flag of the US and the Norwegian flag both.
Granted, he did so *properly* with the US flag pole taller than the other and the Norwegian flag on the proper side of it and very few people other than Boy Scouts or Marines likely know what proper *is*...
But flying a foreign flag just isn't that shocking.
It really isn't.
And internet acquaintance from Italy was talking about the fetish that Americans have with flags. We stick flags all over everything and we have stores who sell flags from all over the world. She thought it was odd, but apparently catching because she happened on one of these shops and was walking out of it with a little US/Italian double flag pin before she realized she'd been sucked right into the vortex with us.
Hurrah, Palin is a Christian Zionist. I love it! To the greater glory of Israel!
Like Sullivan needs to have a psychosis to conclude Palin is a fruitcake who tells all sorts of tall tales.
Nice way to obfuscate the Trig-truther psychosis. So it must be true because it feels right?
Sure, paranoids have enemies but they're still paranoids.
miller, you don't get it anymore than Michelle-flick-her-cute-hairdo did, Sullivan-the-great-OB notwithstanding.
You lied. Don't you get that?
"Backpedaling" is not an option.
Neither is "I meant..."
What? You think this place has rational people reading and writing on it?
Ha!
Michael H
You got it man.
It's the end.
And it's not even 2012 yet.
wv foretab
The bill at the bar b4the end.
Psychologists call them "zebras." It's how we judge people.
Since most people are a mix of good and bad qualities - very few are all one or the other - if we think they have more good qualities than bad, we like them.
Similarly, if we think they have more bad than good, we dislike them.
Once making our judgment - good person or bad - we tend to ignore that evidence that conflicts with our view and concentrate on those that re-inforce our beliefs.
"Aha, I knew that bastard was a crook" or "Yep, good old Charlie is like that."
Add good old fashioned political tribalism and one new fashioned internet blogging and we have Sarah Palin.
Or Barack Obama.
Or George Bush.
That's my story and I'm sticking with it.
JAL said...
@ garage Her last pregnancy WAS fucking strange.
Care to elaborate oh great one?
I had a pregnancy at age 43. Delivered at age 44.
For reasons not pertinant to this list, we did NOT tell anyone outside our immediate family for more than 6 months. As a matter of fact, my husband's co-workers were entirely blown away when I delivered, as we had socialized with them while I was in my last trimester.
How people choose to handle their pregnancies is their business.
You pro-choice? Privacy issue, right?
But flying a foreign flag just isn't that shocking.
It really isn't.
>>>
It isn't shocking to the ones complaining about it either, they just think it might be able to damage her.
wv Natery: What those nattering nabobs of negativity sound like.
Her last pregnancy WAS fucking strange.
Oh no, garage! Not you too! Please step away from the crazy. Do I need to quote down syndrome/age of mother stats again?
And internet acquaintance from Italy was talking about the fetish that Americans have with flags. We stick flags all over everything and we have stores who sell flags from all over the world.
Heh, is that an American thing? I know I've seen people go with Mexican/Irish/Italian etc.. flags. I guess it's how we stay close to our heritage, since we pretty much all moved here from somewhere. But that doesn't explain all the football flags and thanksgiving flags....
Also in the diablog Ann mentioned that she wishes we could all just move past looking to politicians for pop psychological reasons, and not invest so much in such seemingly empty personalities as Obama and Palin.
So why why why is she constantly bringing it back to the center?
As she noted, "I'm a constitutional scholar."
So let's here some constitutional-ly stuff! Wow us with that.
Her last pregnancy WAS fucking strange.
You only think the voices are your friends, really.
Synova - "But flying a foreign flag just isn't that shocking.
It really isn't."
Perhaps you would have no problem with walking into Gov Bill Richardson's office and seeing the State of New Mexico, the US Flag, and the Mexican flag behind his desk.
I would.
Perhaps you would have no problem with a Chinese-American high trade official that had a PRC flag flying in front of his house along with the US one.
I would.
Maybe you would have no problem being in the military and walking into the office of a Major Army doctor who has the US flag and a green arabic one saying "There is no God but Allah, glory to Allah and smite his foes".
I would.
You might no object if an Indoenesian flag suddenly appears alongside a Kenyan and US one behind Obama in the Oval Office.
I would.
And I'd object on the same dual loyalty grounds if Palin was deeply Catholic and had a Vatican City flag installed in her office instead of a Zionist one..at least before she quit.
Perhaps you would have no problem with walking into Gov Bill Richardson's office and seeing the State of New Mexico, the US Flag, and the Mexican flag behind his desk.
>>>
I'd just be happy he had a US flag in there, as long as it was displayed properly. I dunno, I see plenty of Mexican flags all over the place in my neighborhood. Its not a big deal.
"Perhaps you would have no problem with walking into Gov Bill Richardson's office and seeing the State of New Mexico, the US Flag, and the Mexican flag behind his desk."
If the Mexican flag was displayed equal to the other two behind his desk... yeah, that would seem inappropriate.
If he had a tiny little Mexican "flag on a stick"?
No. It would not bother me.
The Israeli flag in Palin's office, unless she had *two*, was a little flag stapled to a stick!
This is not a humongous Che banner or flag draped back-drop.
Perhaps you would have no problem with walking into Congressman Barney Frank's office and seeing his freak flag flying?
walking into Congressman Barney Frank's office and seeing his freak flag flying?
At his age...? Half-mast, at best.
Andrew is going to destroy himself because of his Mommy Obsession with Palin, because this is just what this is.
Good God, this is nothing if not Oedipal. Palin is a threat to his Mancrush, Obama. It's as if, somewhere in his past, his real Mum scolded him right and proper when she found out, to her horror, that he was just like that Nasty Elton John. He's transferring all of his issues that he had with Mum to Palin (although Andrew's real Mum is probably a nice lady).
This is too much of an obsession. There MUST be Oedipal issues here. The whole Trig/Vagina thing just screams Mommy Don't Persecute Me Any Longer.
Sarah needs to give Andrew a big hug.
Aren't we just all fagged out? No more Andrew posts. Pleaassse.
Ann, I don't understand you and Sullivan - the guy's a fruitcake but, still, you and Michelle, and Glenn Reynolds, and The Atlantic treat him like he's - what? - an intellectual, or something, worthy of discussion? Not even close. It definitely doesn't reflect well on y'all that keep bringing this conspiracy theorist up like his bizarre outlook matters.
Can you explain this to me?
Let the record show, I was the first blogger to post the Israeli flag photo.
It's dated 2 Sept 2008, when I screencaptured it from a "Hiking with Sarah" tourism video.
It was 3 days after her rollout in Dayton, Ohio.
Cheers,
Victoria
wv: gostatin!
I always thought it was diva -vlog. Ah well.
WV: myopa - my mistake was indicative of my myopia.
Nice Victoria -
That video and photo are obviously photoshopped because everyone knows it wasn't her baby!
She could not have been "obviously pregnant."
Sheesh. This is how rumors get started.
Victoria,
lol! I remember that flag.
Victoria, what happened to your blog, are you back to Medicine now
The Topless Ann Althouse
(Please don't sit there, goggling open-mouthed at me like that. It's Tom Maguire's blog posting, RE: this one by the Professor.) ;)
Palladian asked a long time ago, when people were still reading this thread, whether The Atlantic cares more for pageviews or reputation.
The sad truth is that for The Atlantic these goals are not contradictory, because the editors and writers there care most about their reputation with the cultural Left, among whom it's laudable to defame enemy-icons such as Sarah Palin (no matter how ridiculous the defamation.) It's a group bonding experience.
Re: lies. Anyone who's gone through a divorce (or a particularly nasty breakup) will recognize the emotional dimension to the "liar" accusation.
For example, if you told the kids you were going to take them to the zoo on Saturday, and then it rained all day so you decided to take them to a movie instead, your ex-wife will call you a liar.
What it means is "I hate you". Nothing more, nothing less.
Andrew hates Palin for the simple reason that he is a Homosexual and she is a Christian woman. He somehow blames Sarah for his HIV infection. There I said it.
Buzz, you mean Sully thinks that Plain used her fundamentalist Christian fu to incite a vengful God to give him AIDS?
OK, I guess that's as good a theory as I've heard on this subject.
There I said it.
Posters... posterettes: I have my own theory, re: Sullivan's raging, full bore PDS. ;)
It's irrelevant why he does what he does.
It's the what. He is acting crazy.
Avoid him like you'd avoid a deranged homeless guy waving a copy of Pravda.
St. Sarah of Wasilla
by David Benjamin
Sarah Palin's latest buzz accompanies the publication of her campaign memoir, Going Rogue. But the book is a ghost-written collaboration, making it a poor measure of the singular marvel that is Sarah Palin. To better get the drift of this woman's weird, wonderful career, I go back to her star-spangled, lightning-bolt Fourth-of-July resignation as governess of Alaska.
Within minutes of that shocker, talking heads everywhere struggled to make sense of Palin's rambling series of excuses, rationalizations, platitudes, dares and non sequiturs. Every last analyst staggered away, mystified.
But Palin's followers - without exception - understood, intuitively and completely. They rejoiced in the inspiration of what she had said, as well as what she hadn't said and what she was incapable of saying.
Even they, however, did not know what she meant. No one did, nor will anyone ever really grasp her meaning that day. And that's the point. In the Zen universe of Sarah Palin, meaning is the most meaningless thing of all!
Anyone who has tried to fathom the Palin phenomenon is eventually surprised that she bothers to speak at all. But she loves talking, to the delight of her fans and to the utter befuddlement of anyone who regards languge as a serious medium of communication.
Words are not Sarah Palin's currency, nor would she command her immense army of ardent followers if she had a "way with words." When asked about "issues," Palin either recites an irrelevant aspect of her biography (looking across the Bering Strait at Vladimir Putin, covering high school hockey games for the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman), or she rattles off a mind-numbing series of talking points, seemingly memorized off a laminated card handed to her by Grover Norquist.
Asked about any domestic problem - education, unemployment, breast cancer, etc. - she invariably advocates cutting taxes. Given problems of a more metaphysical nature, she will come around to invoking Jesus.
Respond to her that even Jesus approved of taxes - "unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" - and she will answer with only a smile that says, "You're trying to trap me with words again, but I can't he-e-ear you."
She's pro-life, she says. But the only branch of government that she and her followers approve is the military, which is in the business of killing. Is this not a profound contradiction, an ethical dilemma that merits reflection and moral anguish?
Nah. It's words. Just words. To hell with words.
Conservatives claim Sarah as one of them. She tolerates the linkage. But she's not, really, if you figure that modern conservatism proceeds in a historical line from Adam Smith and Edmund Burke to Ayn Rand, William F. Buckley, Irving Kristol, George Will and smarty-pants guys like that. Conservatism has always been stirred by intellectual ferment and lively discourse, bestowing on its current adherents traditions, policies, positions, unsettled arguments and great books. Conservatism has a literature.
But Sarah Palin doesn't read - at least not snooty stuff like "literature." None of her people read - except for Scripture. Reading, after all, is just a lot of words.
Sometimes, Palin comes off as a sort of lumpen-populist, metaphorically defending the trailer-park gates against an army of tree-huggers and bleeding-hearts who want to break up the annual all-Alaska spotted owl and dolphin roast. But her style, her clothes, her hair, her lack of butchness - these are not populist. They're petty bourgeois. She wears makeup even when she's dressed in waders.
When Going Rogue came out, her ex-friends in the McCain campaign called Palin a liar. On MSNBC, Keith Olbermann went to considerable pains to cite passages in her book that were contradicted either by facts or by past statements Palin had made herself.
Olbermann missed the point. There are no lies in Sarah's book; nor in her life, nor in her heart. Utterances that seem untrue are not lies, because Sarah believes them true. If she says one thing, then later forgets what she said and says the opposite, Sarah Palin is neither lying nor mistaken, nor forgetful, because at each moment, she believes what she has said. And a minute later, she will believe something else, if she says it. Whatever she says, if she says it, will be true. But if it's not, so what? It's words, only words.
Sooner or later, words fail everyone. This goes double for Sarah and her faithful. Sarah Palin is the voice - and the embodiment - of the inarticulate.
When Sarah Palin says something that doesn't seem to make sense to most of us, her people - the tongue-tied and frustrated - understand perfectly, because that's exactly what they would have said, if only they could.
What Olbermann and the word-obsessed, meaning-seeking media cannot grasp is that Sarah Palin is not someone you believe. She is someone you believe in.
She is not a politician. She is a prophet.
She is the earthly incarnation of an ideal beyond earthly comprehension that only those who believe in her believe in, although it's beyond their comprehension. Like all prophets, she is the answer to questions her followers are incapable of expressing. She is what they are, and she is what they would be if they weren't what they are.
Watch Sarah Palin with the audio turned off. You will sense what her followers feel. In her ill-controlled face, there is sheer amazement at being so high for so little reason. There is defiance of all those equally amazed. And there is a smugness in the assurance that there ain't nobody gonna knock her down and she never has to explain how she ever got there.
As if she could.
In her gestures and in her gaze, one feels the spirit of another people's prophet, equally indifferent to coherent speech, equally disdained by the literate and the elite, but equally beloved of the insulted and injured. His motto was: "I am what I am."
His name, as any real American knows, was Popeye.
Yesterday, I posted:
"If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table."
The poor, foaming PDS-afflicted amongst us are now reduced to ineffectually pounding the table.
Everyone please remember to thank Ritmo, on your way out at the end of class, for demonstrating the unvarnished, unwinkable truth of said statement for our benefit.
And just as soon as one of you can reach in through the bars of the cage long enough to give the foam on his lips a quick wiping, I'll lob today's box of animal crackers in there for him, as well.
@Ritmo:
You could start your own ministry & call it the Dissemblies of God church.
I think you are confusing her with our dear President, who says things
like "I've always said" even when
referring to things he has had a different opinion about, which is
catalogued on tape, (ie: the public
option, the war of necessity in Afghanistan,. In his vieweverything
is Caesar's, the banks the auto companies, charities, the media (if
we are to go by the likes of Mark Lloyd)any abrogation of government power is a negative right, an interference in the plan to redistribute the wealth, 'because
'reparations don't go far enough'
MUL (d.b.a. BSR or RB) is an example of someone who cannot think for himself but instead either posts long copies of someone else's thinking (using violating copyright) or by posting something his random phrase generator has created.
I would challenge you to find original, cogent thinking, but it is a fool's errand.
Palladian -- And it makes you sound like a lefty. I don't know how long the radical left has been using the term "lies" in this manner, but go to any lefty word-mill on the web and you'll see the term frequently. Nothing turns them on more than calling someone a "liar". Mistakes, misstatements, blunders, and simply unpopular ideas sound so much more sinister when labeled LIES. I suspect it has origins in the communist practice of denunciation.
My impression is that it started right after Bill Clinton left office. Because of Clinton's weird psychopathology he loved to tell blatant lies that his supporters would then be compelled to defend even though both we and they knew that their defenses were absurd. (Bill Clinton's DNA matching the semen on the blue dress does not prove any sexual activity for example).
The years of defending against the charges of "Lies" made the lefties anxious to make the same accusations, I think.
As somebody pointed out (Ann Coulter?), it is nice to see that the Democrats finally concede that lying is a bad thing but it would be nice if they would learn that a lie is not just something that you disagree with.
Crack Emcee- did Ann answer? If not, I can try: it's for the eyeballs that she writes about people like Andrew Sullivan. They're easy to put down.
___________
Random thoughts: Tiki Barber is gorgeous and there's good coffee EVERYWHERE in Miami! Mmm mmm good!
Don't forget to go to Cafe Versailles (vuh-sah-yes) in Little Havana! Best cafecito in town. ;)
Via Little Miss Attila's link, a photo of Andrea Mitchell virtually shoving the Newsweek cover in Palin's face, in an ambush-setup type of meeting.
Check out that FACE man. Sca-ry.
Of course, we've seen that expression before on journalists when interviewing Palin before. They happen to be female reporters.
Like Katie Couric interviewing Palin.
Excellent photo links Victoria. Those journalistas project nothing but scorn. I think Oprah herself even had some facial scorn for Palin, but I never saw the whole interview. Those women need to learn how those looks play in middle America.
That there's no motivation here doesn't mean it's an "odd lie" — which is Sullivan's term. It means it's not a lie at all.
to claim there's no motivation at all is mind-reading.
the fact that there's no apparent motivation is what makes it odd.
but you don't know Palin's motivations. you don't know why she chose to same something as ridiculous as that flag comment.
It doesn't motivate me to go through the rest of the long list systematically to see what each item is about
yeah, right. blame the messenger.
How interesting that you waded through so many lies to settle on the most innocuous of the bunch. And how fortunate that this lie (originally number 23 in Sullivan's list) was so easily Googled that you could reference Sullivan's admission of its tameness rather than tackle one of the more illustrative and damaging examples. In blogging about this particular "odd lie", you are as disingenuous as you accuse Sullivan of being. Your offense is further compounded by your allusion that all the documented lies are of this same picayune ilk. Is that intellectually honest?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा