"It is a modern full-floor unit in a high-rise on the East Side of Manhattan that could belong to a socialite or the editor of a lifestyle magazine. There is ample light and a tasteful lack of clutter. The kitchen appliances are made of brushed steel; the countertops are slate. In the earth-toned living room hangs a painting, in vibrant colors, of a woman in a swimsuit."
Ha ha. The NYT has its ideas about how to draw in its readers. The article is about blogging — hardcore, political blogging — but ... check out her apartment!
In spite of this lavish attention, Geller is unhappy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
55 comments:
Lavish attention?
It's a fucking hatchet job and part of the NY Times' attempts to help terrorists recruit in New York so they can sell more newspapers after the next attack.
One only hopes a Pratt & Whitney engine will careen through the newsroom next time.
Geller gets it that the chattering class elites can no longer demonize her (or any opponent) in the eyes of the despised peasantry by calling that person a racist or a bigot. This is huge if not hugh and the anointed are shitting their pants as the realization that their con is over becomes daily more apparent.
Don't know if I buy everything she says in her rebuttal (saw it last night off Insta), but she is getting the Alinsky treatment for not bowing down to the multi-culti, diversity PC nonsense and standing up for her city and the people who died in the Towers and she's not going to let them get away with it.
Good for her.
Too bad Dubya didn't act the same way when the Dick from Illinois and the Chap of Quiddick started belching all that nonsense about torture.
WV "cavitess" Female cavity
So that's Pam Geller. I didn't realize what her ouvre was. I just skimmed the article, but will go back and read.
The previous comments are well taken, but why grant the NY Times an interview and then complain about what they write?
Geller isn't some naive person, she knows that the NYT would do a hatchet job on her. If it were me I would not have granted an interview; or failing that, I would have held it in a Starbucks. No doubt she thought she could control the end product by giving an interview but I'd have preferred them to do any profile of me without my cooperation.
When I read this article this morning about this woman I have never heard of before it dawned on me that Ann is trying to get some of this woman's action.
Sorry Ann but warmed over rightwing demagogery is getting pretty common in this country. Also, the bikini doesn't fit.
She should have done the interview on the beach.
Just sayn.
My goodness, that article in the Times is just loaded with code words and phrases, isn't it? I skimmed Geller's rebuttal last night, also after Insty, but it didn't say anything, really, that many of us haven't figured out long ago about the NYT. Oddly enough, it was the least interesting post I've read on her site. Who do you figure is her target audience? The self satisfied sorts that religiously read the NYT to get news are beyond help don't you think?
"If it were me I would not have granted an interview; or failing that, I would have held it in a Starbucks. No doubt she thought she could control the end product by giving an interview ... "
It's much better to grant them the interview ... but record it yourself also so that you can document their mendacity later.
Grant the interview, but on the condition that you will film the interview.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
"When I read this article this morning about this woman I have never heard of before ..."
How can you be so uninformed as to have never before heard of Pam Geller?
That says a lot about you.
Pam knew full well what the NYT would do, Jim_J. She even posted about it saying she was nervous and unsure. But Pam has written today that there is a silver lining; more people know who she is, what her thoughts are in her own words, and she is getting emails and comments from folks who had never heard of Pamela Geller or Atlas Shrugs, they like what she has to say and what she is doing.
Remember the Hollywood dictum: there's no bad publicity as long as they spell my name right. In the long run, Pam wins, NYT loses.
Just to be clear - I read the NYT regularly, but not religiously. I read it with my critical thinking engaged, weighing what's said as I do any other paper.
Jake said...
Sorry Ann but warmed over rightwing demagogery is getting pretty common in this country. Also, the bikini doesn't fit.
warmed over rightwing demagogery = people sick of the Left's anti-American propaganda and saying so.
I didn't see anything in the article that I didn't expect to see either: Gellar, an intolerant bigot.
The article is a net positive, particularly the contrast between Geller's unforgiving view of Islam, and the NYT default belief in Islam's absolute benign-ness.
From a personal viewpoint, it is unsurprising to me that the champion, Pam Geller, is a Jewish girl from virtual Brooklyn (technically Long Island); a match against ANY man, Gentile woman, or fomenting imam.
Interesting, too, that Geller got her start at Little Green Footballs, and [also] jumped ship after Charles Johnson metaphorically slammed his head into the pavement during a bicycle accident.
In spite of the lavish attention? Does this infer that her goal is attention rather than an accurate portrayal?
Pamela seems like a woman consumed with purpose. I can see that she would be totally frustrated with the fluff elements of the piece, and even mores if they are inaccurate.
"Interesting, too, that Geller got her start at Little Green Footballs,"
Really? I first heard about her on MILF Hunter. Who knew?
Yeah, the NYT is pretty much a politically correct lifestyle magazine. They give you a tasteful, respectable set of poltical beliefs to go along with your slate countertops and brushed steel kitchen appliances.
What a contrast between Geller's impeccable taste in kitchen decor and her retrograde political beliefs! The NYT's core audience of upper-middle class white women loves this stuff.
I apologize for commenting annoyingly on her hotness.
Poor Geller. She's so poor, she can't afford to get an office somewhere and has to work from her home.
Hey, Liz. Glad to see you here.
Pam Geller plays scruffy New York hardball, the left doesn't like it.
Tough.
WV: flamart, a big box store in Florida.
The article is about blogging — hardcore, political blogging — but ... check out her apartment!
They know their readers.
Yeah. Let's check it out.
It's located in the posh upper East side and lavishly furnished courtesy of her ex-husband.
Trooper: She's got a blog post from the beach, actually.
It's tons more interesting than the oh so nuanced but oh so persnickety crap that EBL posts.
One thing Geller does that Althouse could stand to do is to speak her mind unabashedly, without getting caught up in the political details of how to maintain infinite and everlasting amounts of audience love.
MILF Hunter. Lol.
Re "lavish attention," Pamela Geller wrote at Atlas Shrugs that she didn't want to do the interview but the Times reporters said they were doing the profile anyway, so she decided to talk to them. She knew what the piece was going to be like, and she was right.
The real story about Pamela Gellar is how Charles Johnson went insane.
It's located in the posh upper East side and lavishly furnished courtesy of her ex-husband.
Yes because Ritmo believes firmly and sincerely that everyone must pull themselves up by the bootstraps!
Only the small business owners, Alex. Only the small business owners.
Maguro, hate to quibble with a disciple of Marvin the Martian, but what, EXACTLY, in YHO, ARE those *retrograde* political beliefs that Geller holds? Your assignment--if you decide to accept it--is to define, compare and contrast...and no extra credit for inventive snark, if you please.
So Ritmo - if you are a CEO of a medium-sized business, screw him right?
And New "Hussein" Ham is dead on tgt about recording and/or taping the entire interview--should be a non-negotiable weasel-zapper minimum requirement for interview to be granted.
Blah blah blah... stupid idea...gobbledygook... RIGHT?
(The Crypto Jew)
Blah blah blah... stupid idea...gobbledygook... RIGHT?
IF you are referring to your postings, well yes I'd have to agree with you. One of the first times I have...
@virgil - I meant that Geller's views are retrograde from the NYT's perspective. Opposing the ground zero mosque in particular and denying the wonderfulness of Islam in general are pretty serious thoughtcrimes at the NYT.
Nonetheless, her kitchen looks fab.
I'm sure you knew I was referring to Alex, Joe. But you're too unoriginal a dumbfuck to have come up with a better comeback.
(The Crypto Jew)
But you're too unoriginal a dumbfuck to have come up with a better comeback.
Wow, I am wounded to the quick with THAT witty repartee....Dumb F*ck...that's the best you've got? Om Yhwh, yuo are a sad dood/doodette.
Trooper,
Dude...
LOL!
Tough to be a woman with a serious purpose, and also good looking.
Robert Spencer,
Hey, are you the Robert Spencer? Welcome! And do stick around and help contribute some meaningful direction for the discussion--or just wait and see what hilarity ensues when our regular anti-Semite Cedarford arrives. :-(
Not meant to be witty. Just the best description of what you are.
I'm amazed that the NYT didn't just go ahead and call her a Nazi too. I support her and the anti-islamic movement she supports as well. And for being in her 50's she's hot as hell.
Elsewhere in the Times, there is a report on the goons, as they describe themselves, who committed truly sickening atrocities against a man because he was gay. The Times profiles the leader of the attack. There can be no doubt that he is a subhuman piece of shit based on the facts presented.....If the day before the attack, that same young man had gotten into a confrontation with the police and been shot, the Times would have presented those same facts, and you would have marvelled at his strength of character and the tragedy of such a fine life cut short.....I read the Times profile. It was very damaging. She sounded like a rich dilletante who took up Islamaphobia as hobby. I also read her own words. In her own words, she comes off as witty, good natured, and more opionated than bigoted. I don't believe the Times profile.
She has a nice set of breasts. My sense is that they are fake but I am completely ok with that. She has definitely had some pulling along the face as well. Again, perfectly fine. She looks pretty good.
thank you and good day.
Sorry Maguro. Didn't sound like you. My powers of perception have been degraded by an occluded Whiskey-Front which came in fast, low and early this pm involving "mass quantities" of Haiti's "Rhum" Barbancourt 5-Star. Just doing my bit helping to reconstruct their economy as a good neighbor and all that...
Smart lady about Islam - and many other things.
Drip, drip, drip is right . . .
It's so tediously unsurprising that a bottom dwelling fanatic and hate monger like this preening bigot bimbo should find so much appreciation from this crowd.
"It's so tediously unsurprising that a bottom dwelling fanatic and hate monger like this preening bigot bimbo should find so much appreciation from this crowd."
No, what's tedious are people who just call names instead of addressing the problem, which is radical Islam (as if there were any other), and the increasing appeasement of its encroachment on Western civilization.
No, what's tedious are people who just call names instead of addressing the problem, which is radical Islam (as if there were any other), and the increasing appeasement of its encroachment on Western civilization.
That's what fanatics do. Critical thinking turned off, demo-gouge mode ON.
NYT wasn't nearly hard enough on her. Atlas Shrugs is a cesspool of a blog (not to mention a pretty silly book to take seriously!).
I'm more interested in Geller's body and in her actions than in her mind or in her thoughts.
In general, I think we over-educated moderns pay too much attention to the minds and thoughts of Homo and far too little attention to the details of Homo's anatomy and to Homo's sometimes exquisite movements.
Not so the human anatomy when static. Although that can be occasionally interesting, usually it doesn't tell us that much because artifice can play too large a part in deceiving us.
No, the unadorned human body in vigorous motion is what's revealing. To the practised eye it tells us far more about a person than their carefully chosen words on a predictably boring blog.
So, for starters, could someone provide a video link to Geller jogging naked or playing volley ball naked on the beach, say?
Then, for balance, and of course we should always have balance, follow that up with a video link to Obama jogging naked or playing volley ball naked on the beach.
I'm not usually a fan of people with Geller's passion, except when they are right and the forces they oppose are truly dangerous. She is, and they are. I'd like her in my foxhole.
Look at the negative comments about her here, and you see the empty name calling that defines her detractors. Not one word of reason, yet. Just like the NYT.
"...addressing the problem, which is radical Islam (as if there were any other), and the increasing appeasement of its encroachment on Western civilization."
If you think this, among all the grave problems facing us, is actually something to fear, to see as an existential threat, then you're as nutty as Pamela Geller.
Certainly, terrorists who identify as Muslim fundamentalists are a dangerous and violent force, a true threat to human life and limb and (regional) civic stability, but they do not represent an existential threat except insofar as we allow demagogues and power mongers to use them to scare us into surrendering our civil liberties and rule of law without protest. This is a real and existential threat, and we may have passed the point of no return. The threat "radical Islam" presents to us is largely in the damage we are eager to do to ourselves--and have done--in the name of "protecting ourselves" from what amounts to a statistically small group of violent thugs.
Do I lose sleep at night worrying about Islam? Not a bit, and I live in NYC and work blocks from the Twin Towers site. I do worry about the economic devastation wrenching our country, and the social and civic instability this, coupled with fear-mongering about Muslim terrorists, may bring about.
Robert Cook said...
It's so tediously unsurprising that a bottom dwelling fanatic and hate monger like this preening bigot bimbo should find so much appreciation from this crowd.
Hey, Cookie. I don't see you offering your neck up for the religion of peace. Don't like the brand of haircuts they offer?
"Hey, Cookie. I don't see you offering your neck up for the religion of peace. Don't like the brand of haircuts they offer?"
I find it nearly impossible to find meaning in this statement, except for the one possibility I can infer: are you suggesting that--in stark contrast to my cowardly name-calling--Pamela Geller has bravely (sic) put herself in some sort of danger, that scary boogie-men "radical Islamic" terrorists are going to target her for her shrieking--I mean, uh, "stirring" clarion call against them?
It is to laugh.
Post a Comment