२४ फेब्रुवारी, २०१५
James Taranto observes the hazing of Scott Walker...
... in yesterday's Best of the Web — enter here — which quotes my "Get used to it, coasties" post from last Saturday.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१७ टिप्पण्या:
You need to copy write the Blog and charge royalties.
Good work, Professor Althouse.
The WSJ editorial page loves Scotty.
They are with him 1000 percent.
But who will haze the hazers?
Taranto used to be an important voice on the right.
No more. Now you gotta pay.
So his readership and contributorship have gone rapidly to zero.
I don't agree with Matt Lewis and I've never been impressed with Marco Rubio, yet another unimpressive comment from him.
“To have a civilized debate, it’s necessary for public officials to disown such beyond-the-pale rhetoric,” harrumphs Milbank.
Funny how the need for a civilized debate is always one sided. I never heard reporters demanding the Obama or Hillary disown their beyond-the-pale rhetoric in 2008. Nor for that matter do I recall a single instance of any reporter demanding any Democrat disown harsh rhetoric from another Democrat. Walker is smart not to play their silly games.
Larry,
In fairness, Obama was asked, and did distance himself from the harsh rhetoric of Rev. Wright.
Bob Ellison: Taranto used to be an important voice on the right.
No more. Now you gotta pay.
Well, you don't have to.
Go directly to the Best of the Web on the WSJ site. For this particular entry, the URL is http://www.wsj.com/articles/lets-you-and-him-fight-1424726375.
Copy-and-paste that URL into Google's search box. The first link in Google will be the extended referral link that I used in this post. Clicking that Google link takes you to the article without having to log in.
DanTheMan said...
Larry,
In fairness, Obama was asked, and did distance himself from the harsh rhetoric of Rev. Wright.
Perhaps so. I suspect both the asking and the distancing were based on political expedience since Rev. Wright was becoming an issue that made Obama look bad.
Another way to do it, SeanF, is just copy and paste the article title into Google Search and put "wsj" at the end.
Sometimes the page hasn't been indexed yet and you have to wait a little while before it shows up in Google search, but once it has it works every time, as long as you aren't logged in to the WSJ website with a non-subscriber account. Any article on their website can be read for free this way.
In response to the question of whether Obama was a Christian, I think Walker should have said: "I don't know. I know he plays one on TV."
No one is perfect....that's why pencils have erasers.
thank you.
Actually going through Google every time is annoying. I just use software that sets a custom HTTP referer [sic], and every time I go to the WSJ, it lets me in, no matter how I get there.
In fairness, Obama was asked, and did distance himself from the harsh rhetoric of Rev. Wright.
Is Wright a Dem?
And why did it take 20 years for Obama to notice that his preacher was fucking nuts?
And why has he basically eschewed church entirely since he left Wright?
"And why has he basically eschewed church entirely since he left Wright?"
Accept no substitutes.
bbkingfish: "The WSJ editorial page loves Scotty.
They are with him 1000 percent."
Percentages are racist.
A racist dog whistle.
A racist dog whistle white man construct.
Your link, Prof. Althouse, in its effort to avoid the WSJ's paywall, took me instead to today's BotW column. Yesterday's column, behind the paywall, is here for WSJ subscribers.
Usually Taranto seems to take pleasure in referring to you as a "blogress," but this time you were "Wisconsinite Ann Althouse."
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा