May 22, 2022

"Depp fans resemble Trump fans in their blind loyalty and willingness to set aside ugly facts about their hero..."

"Like Trump fans, Depp fans act like they’re in a cult. They call Heard’s claims of domestic violence a hoax and cheer on Depp lawyer Camille Vasquez, in a sort of online Roman coliseum, whenever she asks a tough question of Heard.... Whatever the jury decides, a man who was once the King of Cool now seems like a washed-up, abrasive shell of his former self.... And Depp stans at the courthouse will hear no evil about Captain Jack Sparrow. All across the world, customized facts are the rage. Truth has left the building."

Writes Maureen Dowd in "Johnny Depp and Other Pirates" (NYT).

I bet Trump loves this column: If Depp is like him, then he is like Depp. When people love you, they are loyal.

But, Dowd asks, what about Truth? Isn't it terrible that people aren't loyal to Truth?

I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?

105 comments:

MayBee said...

I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?

Exactly, Althouse.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Everything bad resembles Trump!

Yeah leftists - and every insipid, predictable and boring resembles the collective hivemind left uni-thoughts..

Hey Booms said...

I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?

Because, you know, Liberals

traditionalguy said...

Alternate Realty truth is what the MSM propagandists say the peasants must believe it is on their command. Trump and Musk discover truths that sets us free. Take your choice. That’s not loyalty.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

OT:

The Typhoid Mary of Disinformation

Former Bush-Cheney propagandist now works for MSNBC. Gadfly like her.

Lurker21 said...

It's a messy world. There are plenty of facts that speak against either side, whether it's Depp v. Heard or Trump v. Clinton/Biden. You pick the lesser of the evils. The media's chosen role is to tell you that all the evil is on one side. Many people pick the other as a response to such brainwashing, but often the side they take really is the less egregious one.

Wince said...

"Johnny Depp and Other Pirates"

Bill Maher said...
"I wanted to be a pirate..."

sykes.1 said...

Please. You think it reasonable to quote Maureen Dowd of all people? Is Peggy Noonan next?

Maybe I'm not getting the joke.

Quaestor said...

I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?

If Dowd was honest, the answer would be readily forthcoming: That which keeps me in love with Hillary is Truth.

Josephbleau said...

“Like Trump fans, Depp fans act like they’re in a cult. They call Heard’s claims of domestic violence a hoax and cheer on Depp lawyer Camille Vasquez, in a sort of online Roman coliseum…” Dowd is very confused. Cult behavior is a group which gives behavioral control to a charismatic leader, the Roman Coliseum represents vulgar entertainment that is a minor part of the crowds life, like watching tv. Don’t mix the metaphors. Tell me NYT, why would a cult be concerned with a public entertainment?

Trump must be a powerful and unique person, to be the baseline comparator for all of societies’s features.

Thorley Winston said...

Trump is a liar and a grifter. He was still preferable to Clinton and Biden.

Depp is a drunk and a junkie. He’s still preferable to someone who cuts off fingers and shits in the bed.

It's not that we are blind to how awful Trump and Depp are - we just recognize that the alternatives we were offered are worse.

ambisinistral said...

Because they operate in such a weird social stratum that trial is oddly fascinating. I shudder to think how scandalous I would have been had, at a young age, I had so much celebrity and money squirting out of my ears.

As fir truth, one of the early things that tripped up Amber was the whole pledged/donated business over the money she was supposedly to give to charity. It just seemed like she was lying when she kept trying to conflate promising and actually paying. That natural thought was, "if she's lying about giving money to a Childrens Hospital what else is she BSing about?" And a lot of her stories sounded like they had a fair dose of BS in them.

The odd thing about that is I think, in the original divorce agreement, there was a time frame to when she had to finally pay that money and she was still well withing that time frame. Not that it might have mattered much -- the seed of doubt over her veracity was already planted, but why didn't her lawyers clarify that later when they had their chance?

Anyway, what an odd lifestyle those two lived. Whatever the truth, it sounds like it was a horrible marriage.

BarrySanders20 said...

Dowd, of the NYT, laments "customized facts." But they were totes awesome when the NYT controlled the narrative, and are still awesome inside the bubble. Message: if you're in the bubble, stay there where it's safe and where you can already find all the newsy facts fit to print.

Dude1394 said...

As soon as you question the other sides truth, yours is immediately suspect.

minnesota farm guy said...

Good question, Ann. Applicable in any number of cases. Becoming particularly obvious in social media and the new "Truth Ministry".

Kevin said...

But, Dowd asks, what about Truth? Isn't it terrible that people aren't loyal to Truth?

Remind me, where does she work again?

Tank said...

A woman who writes for the New York Times is writing about truth having left the building.

Hahahahahahahahaha!

Christopher B said...

"If Depp is like him, then he is like Depp."

This formulation works just as well with comparison of loyalty to Truth and loyalty to Trump.

She isn't elevating Truth, she's bringing it down to Trump's level.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Maureen is an insane ranting demagogue who should not have a public forum to spread her conspiracy theories about who is a hero to whom. This tripe is why I avoid Althouse’s go-to sources.

Spiros said...

Does it matter who's telling the truth? The Woke are behaving like Islamist extremists. Even the most inconsequential slights provoke wildly disproportionate responses. Depp isn't a rapist or a murderer. He's an obnoxious jerk. So what?

And it's time for women to grow up. You got a 50% chance of marrying a scumbag like Depp. Deal with it.

Rabel said...

This means that Amber = Hillary.

Maureen has spoken.

Gahrie said...

But, Dowd asks, what about Truth? Isn't it terrible that people aren't loyal to Truth?

Neither of the Clintons, Hunter Biden, CBF or Anita Hill were available for comment.

RMc said...

When Biden won, I thought, "What will these people do without Trump to write about?" But it's clear The Donald is still living rent-free in millions of heads, and will forevermore.

RMc said...

How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?

Because we're the Good Guys, and they're not. Simple.

Critter said...

What is it about people on the left not understanding people on the right, or even someone who disagrees with them about a big issue? Don’t they have any curiosity about people who see the world a different way? Are they so rigid in their thoughts that they feel threatened to hear disagreement? Down is playing that game again in this article. In my experience there are few views where you can’t find at least some resonance within yourself. That’s one reason horror films are popular. If Dowd experiences any of that she seems determined never to show it. In my lifetime we seem to have gone from conservatives being uptight to leftists being the new uptight group.

J Severs said...

"Truth has left the building." Fact check: TRUE. When you point the finger at someone, there are three fingers pointing at you.

Charlie Eklund said...

I have been watching this trial, and initially thought the claimes of abuse made by that star of Aquaman were legitimate. Now, a couple of weeks and a lot of testimony later, testimony from both principals in the case along with their supporting cast members, I understand why Johnny Depp filed the suit and agree that he, not she, is more likely the victim of domestic violence in this situation. A victim of domestic violence, and so much more; a damaged career and a victim of the cruelest sort of defamation there is, defamation by a once-trusted and once-loved partner.

Has Dowd been watching this trial and listening to the same testimony I have? If so, her abilities of discernment could use some work.

n.n said...

Speaking Truth through deflection. Throw another baby on the barbie, it's over... in progress.

William said...

Bill and Hillary Clinton told some whoppers. However, it must be noted that their whoppers were told in pursuit of the higher truth and, therefore, cannot be counted as lies. On the other hand, anything said in support of a Republican cause, even if technically true, is a lie and probably treasonous. If you accept the truth that abortion is our keystone civil liberty and all other issues--inflation, stock market collapse, nuclear war-- are subordinate to that right, then all these other petty concerns fall into line ...I never much noted any similarity between Johnny Depp and Donald Trump. I suppose you could argue that if Amber Heard's soul were made visible it would look like Hillary, but, other than that, there's not much similarity. The only useful lesson that we can extrapolate from the Johnny Depp case is that rich, beautiful people have problems that are very unlike ours.

The Vault Dweller said...

I have seen a few other pieces like this one bemoaning other people's reactions to the Depp-Heard trial. One was another NYT column, the other was on NPR where the lead in was, "Why is only Amber Heard being dragged on Social Media? We'll ask this question with sociologist..." I assume that the creators of these pieces are upset that they perceive the larger group of people seem to be believing Depp and not Heard. The reactions I've heard from most of the people I talk to are ones of being aghast at what Depp has gone through. I honestly have no idea which side would be more believable to me as I have spent zero time listening to or reading anything from the trial itself. I will note it is interesting that the focus on the pieces seems to be on other people's reactions and not the content of the trial itself. They seem to be skipping the issue of which side is more believable and going straight to figuring out what is wrong with the way the people on "Team Depp" think or act. It seems more like an Ad Hominem attack than an analysis or argument. But while an Ad Hominem may be a fallacy it is frequently effective at silencing people. It is also worth noting that most of what I've heard from, "Team Depp" is usually focused on the contents of the trial itself. It is either the interactions of the judge and the lawyers or the testimony itself.

walter said...

"Whatever the jury decides, a man who was once the King of Cool now seems like a washed-up, abrasive shell of his former self."
She seems like someone coming at this objectively...
"Oh yeah? Well you're a poopy head!"
Wait..

MadTownGuy said...

"I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?"

Ms. Dowd meant 'truthiness.'

chuck said...

There is something nostalgic about the column. My, how time races on. Dowd makes me feel young.

Narayanan said...

I wantzzzs Maureen Dowd likely to write The Truth about Hillary

rhhardin said...

What was the ugly fact about Trump?

Quaestor said...

Quaestor is not a "Depp fan", which one assumes means someone who uncritically enjoys movies starring Johnny Depp, which is pretty goddamned absurd, but what can one expect from such a shopworn crone as Maureen Dowd, who even in those long-gone days of her minor cuteness, was consistently preposterous, tedious, and so relentlessly unfunny and wearisome that horse-laughing at her numskullery was almost immoral, like making sport of a legless man strapped to a furniture dolly?

I enjoyed his performance in Donny Brasco, but he had considerable help from Al Pacino, didn't he? Otherwise, the Depp oeuvre is generally unappealing, especially those creep-out flicks helmed by Tim "Use a Goddamned Comb Once in a While" Burton. However, one must admit Johnny Depp is an impressive character actor.

Amber Heard, on the other hand, is not even remotely in the same league as an actor. To call her performances wooden is an insult to trees. Like the majority of Hollywood starlets, her looks were more effective than her lines. Now that the lines are on her face, her looks no longer cut the mustard, which explains this entire courtroom farce. (Did I just invent a whole genre of comedy?) Her film career being defunct, Heard seeks to stake out a corner of that fertile field called victimhood, but her typically unconvincing performance will foil that plan, one foresees.

The acting business is like the dairy business, a lot of it is in the delivery. Mess up the delivery and all you have to sell is cheese.

wendybar said...

A cult is when a major newspaper refuses to post anything about a Candidates Campaign manager testifying under oath that the Dems’ 2016 nominee personally approved the dissemination of Trump-Russia bank allegations to the media. The same media spread a lie about the other candidate and won Pulitizers, and the elites showered them with praise when they all knew it was all a lie. THOSE people are a cult. THEM and their followers like gadfly who will never understand how badly we have all been being lied to. https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2022/05/21/ari-fleischer-cant-help-but-notice-what-the-ny-times-didnt-find-worthy-of-covering-today/

Robert Cook said...

I don't understand the interest in the sordid marital problems of Depp and Heard. I have little doubt each was abusive to the other, and I am simultaneously sorry for them to have all this shown and talked about in public and disgusted they have taken it to a point such that it has become public fodder.

Temujin said...

Maureen, can I get your opinion of Barack Obama?

Fan-much?

Lem said...

It isn’t like the coliseum and it isn’t like the Oscars either. It’s a man trying to restore his reputation. That’s all a man has, and that’s all he’s ever going to have.

Narr said...

Shorter MoDo: Men, and Republicans, are such beasts!

Breezy said...

If you talk about truth as she has, you are not being loyal to truth, either. There are many many true facts or datapoints. To exclude most to highlight those that you prioritize most is not intellectually honest nor intellectually mature. We as individuals all get that same right, and we all must deal with the varied priorities others hold. As a people empowered with choosing our leaders and subsequent laws, we should be grateful for all the varied viewpoints, not snipe at them!

Quaestor said...

Spiros writes, "And it's time for women to grow up."

Don't hold your breath. Since the first ape-man heard the first ape-woman demand simultaneous autonomy and dependency, that admonition has been ignored.

rcocean said...

When has Dowd ever cared about the Truth? Her whole career is based on liberal/leftist fairy-tales and pushing feeeling and class self-interest over facts and reality. She's Jon Stewart for middle-aged cat ladies.

Robert Cook said...

"What is it about people on the left not understanding people on the right, or even someone who disagrees with them about a big issue? Don’t they have any curiosity about people who see the world a different way? Are they so rigid in their thoughts that they feel threatened to hear disagreement?"

What is it about people on the right not understanding people on the left, or even someone who disagrees with them about a big issue? Don’t they have any curiosity about people who see the world a different way? Are they so rigid in their thoughts that they feel threatened to hear disagreement?"

It's not a one-sided problem, and is probably a natural result of our tribal origins, helped along by our being creatures of both emotion and reason, with emotion being by far the more powerful component of our experience of existence.

Michael K said...

Dowd needs a good man. I fear it is too late for that so she will continue these crazy columns. Trump hate is like life to these lefties. They cannot do without it.

realestateacct said...

The commitment of The Washington Post and NY Times to supporting women who are lying about being abused is astounding. From Anita to Amber with detours for Paula Jones and Juanita Broderick (who were probably telling the truth but were of the wrong class and kind) all their sympathy is for women either unable to find a door to walk out of or who are misrepresenting what happened. I see people are claiming Dr Sabatini groomed a 29 year old scientist because women can't be expected to have any agency. I will give my sympathy to women who have been physically abused who are without money, friends or relatives who can help them, thank you. Your highly paid professional women who go along for the money or career and then complain they got a raw deal can pound sand as far as I'm concerned.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

“Trump must be a powerful and unique person, to be the baseline comparator for all of societies’s features.”

And that’s the only interesting thing about these kind of articles. The desperate need to avoid talking about what an absolute corrupt and incompetent band of garbage your ideological stablemates are. Every cry of “Trump!” is a self-own, an admission of utter failure.

Bilwick said...

It's like Dowd's (or any other "liberal"'s") loyalty to the State. "Democide? What Democide?")

Mason G said...

Cult / hero? Let's see...

People support Trump for his vision of what America can be and the things he's been able to get done, not for who he is. So- why do people support Biden? For his vision of what America can be and the things he's been able to get done? Of course not- nobody wants the things Biden's done (or at least, don't want to publicly admit they want them). They support Biden because he's a Democrat.

Which looks more like a cult?

mikee said...

Althouse could have inserted Dementia Joe's 81 million voters for Trump supporters in this post, without a hair thickness of difference in meaning.

mikee said...

Israel and Palestinians are a great example of how to tell the truth vs a cult. One side can kill every opponent and doesn't. The other side cannot but has spent decades wanting to do so.

There are cultists on both sides in US politics, sure. But only one side ran the Russian collusion hoax,BLMriots, Antifa riots, etc..

Mary Beth said...

All this, for a marriage that lasted barely over a year.

boatbuilder said...

How far into their heads is Trump? Wow.

JPS said...

Thorley Winston put it well at 10:07.

I know people whose loyalty to Trump could fairly be called "blind." Nothing could dissuade them; it's a matter of faith, not reason. For each of those, I know many more whose loyalty is open-eyed, considered, and measured.

Commentators like Dowd, and quite a few Democrats, could benefit from considering why that might be, or they can make themselves feel better by dismissing them all as cultists.

As for Depp, I'm not much interested. I could believe that he abused his ex-wife, but what I'm hearing (from my wife, who actually is finding this interesting) is not very persuasive.

Michael K said...

Your highly paid professional women who go along for the money or career and then complain they got a raw deal can pound sand as far as I'm concerned.

A pretty good movie was made of this topic about 30 years ago. It could not be made today.

Iman said...

Just blame it on the Russians, you Democrat pansies, you.

Bender said...

That's the new leftist insult I guess -- you're just like Trump.

Tom Grey said...

Aren't the anti-Depp folk more like in favor of "Lucy knows best" cultists who, as educators, have mostly failed to teach reading to poorer, lower IQ folk?
Especially as compared to those who support phonics?

In politics, America First supporters want:
end to illegal immigration (mixed on legal immigration),
more law and order and fewer homicides,
less outsourcing of US company jobs to lower cost foreign places,
less trade with Communist China,
lower taxes,
less abortion,
more economic growth,
less government (in theory),
free speech about truth that is politically incorrect (to the ruling Dem elites)
less US resources spent on foreign nation-building or World's policeman duties,
support for, and love of, the United States of America.

They love these America First goals, and Trump seems to, also. So do an increasing number of other Republicans. Not a personality cult, but a previously unheard but growing movement who Trump decided to try to lead - and speaking the desired policies gained the support of the pre-existing movement (like the prior Tea Party).

Bernie is similarly a leader of the Occupy Wall Street movement, but far more Dems have been supporting one big government boondoggle or another.

NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...

"How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?"

I don't have a side.

Blair said...

Depp moved to France precisely because he despises American conservatism. He's one of the few leftists actors who actually made good on his word to move. You could hardly get more off base than comparing him to the Great Maga King(TM).

Blair said...

Depp moved to France precisely because he despises American conservatism. He's one of the few leftists actors who actually made good on his word to move. You could hardly get more off base than comparing him to the Great Maga King(TM).

Jim at said...

Is there anything these idiots can't make about Trump?

Anything at all?

Jamie said...

[Each side's not understanding the other's position is] not a one-sided problem,

It's heavily weighted to one side, though, Robert Cook. Studies Have Shown (as the saying goes) that people on the Right are better at articulating the positions of the Left than vice versa. We on the Right are much more exposed to the thinking of the Left simply by living in a cultural milieu in which it's inescapable, is the usual explanation. Or at least it takes a lot of effort to avoid it.

Your side can easily avoid every hearing a "native" exposition of the views of the Right; what you tend to hear would be the strawmen and tokens of The View and MSNBC and the NYT.

So it's good to have you here. Not only is it useful to have a few people of the Left in the room, (one hopes) to keep those of us on the Right apprised of the latest hits, but also you have a shot at being better informed about what we on the Right think (and, importantly, why and how) than the simple zeitgeist would permit.

Kai Akker said...

---Dowd asks, what about Truth? Isn't it terrible that people aren't loyal to Truth? I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?

MayBee with the first reply on your post is being extraordinarily polite. A few others are more blunt.

What newspaper have you been reading for the last 40 to 50 years? Your question sounds like you haven't learned one thing from all that reading.

YoungHegelian said...

I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult?

Is Dowd really ready to talk about claims of Truth in an unironic way? Well, probably so, since it seems to be the modus operandi of the NYT to carefully hide from its readership all the nastiness of its side in the political/culture wars. They want to maintain the fiction that the other side lies, but that their side, with all its love of contexts, discourses, and systemic this or that, has some relationship to Truth.

Wake up, Maureen! There is no Truth in our Post-Modern world. There are only regnant discourses. This came from the Left. This came from your team. That it has after all these years percolated over to some on the Right should come as no surprise to anyone, least of all at the NYT.

Yancey Ward said...

Someone should bitch-slap the stupid out of Dowd, but it would probably fail.

stunned said...

"And then he tied me to a pole and forced me watch Putin’s speech,” - Amber Heard at the defamation trial in Virginia between the actors.

I always knew that Depp is the hand of the Kremlin.

Skeptical Voter said...

Ah Mo Do. Who often dines alone (hat tip to another thread on Althouse today).

Ms. Dowd doesn't undeerstand that there ae a whole bunch of people out there with opinions similar to mine. In looking at this squalid happening (and most of us sure don't look at it for very long) you want both of them to lose. They say that politics is Hollywood for ugly people. Well these two could replace Schiff and Pelosi

Critter said...

To Robert Cook: I have been around lefties my whole adult life and understand the coherent ones very well. But there are at least several different types of lefties: those harmed psychologically by conservative parents, those with loyalties to various forms of Marxism/progressivism etc. because they fundamentally change America into something we would not recognize as America, those who as you said belong to a tribe that works for them and their career (e.g. all the grifters in the DC swamp) and the single issue absolutist (e.g. pro-abortion). A recently ascendant group stands to benefit from substantial inheritances from their parents’ hard work and feel guilty (but would never give away the money) so live their lives through alignment with the “good” causes in order to assuage their guilt.

I don’t think it’s for lack of understanding that conservatives believe lefties are caricatures, it’s the lack of self-awareness that is hard to understand.

Mutaman said...

"I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult? "

Facts are stupid things.

Mutaman said...

"I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult? "

Facts are stupid things.

tommyesq said...

What she misses is that in the Depp case, as with so many other things in life, we cannot know the real, actual truth. Nobody can say what really happened, we only experience it through the spin and imperfect memories of others. Always doubt certainty.

Paul said...

And the ugly facts about Dowd? Should we set aside them?

I mean it is not like the column she writes is chock full of truth.

PM said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ccscientist said...

Both Depp and Heard strike me as cray-cray so I don't believe anything said in the trial.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

"I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult? "

There's actually a very simple and almost always successful heuristic for that:

If you write "willingness to set aside ugly facts", and then don't immediately follow up with the specific facts, then you are the cult member.

It doesn't work the other way around, because it may be that you emit a list, and they're all lies.

But if you don't even emit the list, don't provide links for the sources of your disputed claims, then you're definitely the cult member.

So, did MoDo provide a list of actual, checkable, facts? I don't care enough to register with the NYT in order to find out

Greg The Class Traitor said...

ambisinistral said...
As fir truth, one of the early things that tripped up Amber was the whole pledged/donated business over the money she was supposedly to give to charity. It just seemed like she was lying when she kept trying to conflate promising and actually paying. That natural thought was, "if she's lying about giving money to a Childrens Hospital what else is she BSing about?" And a lot of her stories sounded like they had a fair dose of BS in them.

The odd thing about that is I think, in the original divorce agreement, there was a time frame to when she had to finally pay that money and she was still well withing that time frame. Not that it might have mattered much -- the seed of doubt over her veracity was already planted, but why didn't her lawyers clarify that later when they had their chance?


If the facts are like what you state, then an honest person would say "I have committed to donating the money, and the donation will be complete by this date."

By insisting that "pledging" and "giving" are the same thing, Heard established that she's just someone who can't be trusted. She established the it's her instinctive choice to lie to make herself look better. And there's nothing her lawyers can do to clean that up.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Robert Cook said...
What is it about people on the right not understanding people on the left, or even someone who disagrees with them about a big issue? Don’t they have any curiosity about people who see the world a different way? Are they so rigid in their thoughts that they feel threatened to hear disagreement?"

It's not a one-sided problem


All the "people of the Right" here are at the blog of a woman of the Left. We read what she has to say, and respond to it.

Because we are not hothouse flowers who can't handle the other side being allowed a voice.

OTOH, the professor has reported that the members of her left wing circle all refuse to look at the comments, and in fact avoid the blog in order to avoid the comments, because they just can't handle being in a place where the other side is allowed to ahem a voice.

Social media isn't being censored by the Right, it's being censored by the Left. With the claim that merely allowing the other side to speak out is "violence"..

Yes, it is almost entirely a one sided problem

bentoak said...

In my lifetime the one place I routinely encountered truth was in a math classroom. Geometry proofs were a special favorite. Imagine that, actually proving something true.

Ornithophobe said...

I've watched the whole trial thus far, and the evidence is overwhelming that Amber Heard was physically, emotionally, and financially abusing her husband. She's a complete and utter nutter and there's not an ounce of evidence that Depp ever did more than call her bad names. I'm not a big Depp fan, I think he's a decent actor but I'm also sure he's a hellaciously damaged human being. But he's self destructive, and I don't believe he's ever struck a woman.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Her columns are like watching Groucho's You Bet Your Life. Say the secret word and win a hundred dollars. Everybody knows her secret word is "Trump". She's struggling to hang onto a shitty job by writing shitty columns. Sad, but it keeps her from working the streets.

Robert Cook said...

"It's heavily weighted to one side, though, Robert Cook. Studies Have Shown (as the saying goes) that people on the Right are better at articulating the positions of the Left than vice versa."

That certainly isn't borne out by the commenters here.

Robert Cook said...

"All the 'people of the Right' here are at the blog of a woman of the Left. We read what she has to say, and respond to it."

How do you presume that Prof. Althouse is a "woman of the left?" She is fairly discreet about her own views. I assume--but do not know--that she is middle-of-the road-ish, a liberal, but not an ideologue and not (as far as I can infer) a "leftist." I could be wrong, and so could you, but only one of us seems aware that we don't really know.

"Yes, it is almost entirely a one sided problem."

Your response does not support your claim.

Marc said...

Maureen Dowd recalls just enough from her catechism to know that Truth exists; what her relationship to Truth is, she is unsure of. There are an awful lot of people in that state, some because their teachers have been so compromised in one way or another or simply incompetent, some because of the choices they've made; everyone's path away from Truth-- the world, the flesh, the devil-- is different, I suppose. Thank goodness, in any event, that there are a limited number of op-ed positions available at the NYT.

Marc said...

Maureen Dowd recalls just enough from her catechism to know that Truth exists; what her relationship to Truth is, she is unsure of. There are an awful lot of people in that state, some because their teachers have been so compromised in one way or another or simply incompetent, some because of the choices they've made; everyone's path away from Truth-- the world, the flesh, the devil-- is different, I suppose. In any event, thank goodness that there are a limited number of op-ed positions available at the NYT.

Gahrie said...

Yes, it is almost entirely a one sided problem

Especially when you realize that most of the bad faith actors on the Right are Never Trumpers.

Gahrie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jamie said...

"It's heavily weighted to one side, though, Robert Cook. Studies Have Shown (as the saying goes) that people on the Right are better at articulating the positions of the Left than vice versa."

That certainly isn't borne out by the commenters here.


That's because we're not here to articulate the views of the Left. We of the Right are here to comment as people on the Right.

Try me. I will be happy to do my best to provide an accurate synopsis of a Left issue.

Actually let's do it right now: what does the committed Left believe about abortion? They believe that a pregnant person's right to bodily autonomy, even when another potential but not yet extant human life is involved, is protected by a right to privacy that is inherent, even if not explicit, in our founding documents, and takes priority over any not-yet-extant human life. That "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" are not constitutional rights but considered by the Founders to be natural rights implies that a pregnant person's pursuit of happiness alone is enough justification for the already-extant pregnant person to take private action to stop the development of a fetus.

Adding to this natural-rights justification, 14th Amendment can be interpreted to imply that a pregnant person's privacy and bodily autonomy are threatened by denying that person the legal ability to stop being pregnant, in a way analogous to the denial of enslaved people's having been denied their privacy, their freedom of movement, and the ownership of their own bodily activity.

Furthermore - we don't live in the 18th century any more, and women's workforce participation (because it is mostly women who get pregnant, even though it is possible for a person who identifies as other than a woman to have the procreational apparatus of a woman) is an important contributor not only to our economy but also to their own pursuit of happiness (see "natural rights," above), and having a baby at the wrong time for the woman interferes with these two goals, so therefore restricting their ability to have a legal abortion is neither societally positive nor properly lawful.

What say you? Did I cover it?

Many of us here disagree with a lot of that, on a number of grounds, and since you're here, Robert Cook, you have a better chance than many on your side of hearing our arguments as we actually give them.

SweatBee said...

My guess is Amber's team isn't going to do a demo in court to show how his foot could have broken the bed. The atty who made this video was in the gallery a time or two last week: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRSxKSMpr8Q

chuck said...

@Robert Cook.

It's true, it's true. I offer no excuses. Taibbi and Greenwald are known Trump cultists these days, and so is everyone else not supporting Biden. The world is overrun with Ultra-MAGA fanbois. Where can I find true lefties in order to broaden my understanding?

Tina Trent said...

When the democrats embrace the Marxists who promise to kill 25 million of us in camps?

Just a spitball.

wildswan said...


"I would ask: How do you know that your loyalty is to Truth and the other side's loyalty is a cult? "

If Trump were President the border would be closed and we'd have full employment with very high minority employment. We'd have energy independence and low gas prices. Fauci would have been replaced by Scott Atlas. The schools would have re-opened everywhere early in 2021, not just in Red states and in the wealthy parts of Blue states. Anti-viral drugs would be available to everyone, not just the wealthy and powerful. Workers wouldn't be forced to wear masks by selfish, partying elites. Homicides would not be rising in the black community. This would all be good and that's the truth.
And there's a cult that turns its collective head and pretends it just doesn't see any of this. None of it.
Cults are loyal to rumors, not to an honest search for the truth.

Josephbleau said...

This whole thing about donating the $7 MM is hilarious. She knew the date that she was to testify. She could have donated it all before that date and cut off the line of questioning. To not, is to say that she is considering to renege on her promise. Perhaps she has lost all the money somehow, if so, say that!

effinayright said...

Robert Cook said...

What is it about people on the right not understanding people on the left, or even someone who disagrees with them about a big issue? Don’t they have any curiosity about people who see the world a different way? Are they so rigid in their thoughts that they feel threatened to hear disagreement?"
***************

Hilarious. AS IF the "right" is every single day engaging in "cancel culture" all around the country.

The "Walking Woke" like Cookie here have absolutely no interest in what conservatives and "deplorables" think, so much so that they seek to silence, censor, and ruin ---financially and reputationally--all people whose arguments they refuse to acknowledge, let alone engage.

Gahrie said...

How do you presume that Prof. Althouse is a "woman of the left?" She is fairly discreet about her own views. I assume--but do not know--that she is middle-of-the road-ish, a liberal, but not an ideologue and not (as far as I can infer) a "leftist."

Let's see, she's fanatical in her support for abortion and gay marriage, thinks SNL is still funny, reads the WaPo and NYT daily, believed CBF, attacked Sandmann, publicly refused to vote for Trump's re-election, and supports emotion over reason.

I'd be interested in you providing citations of where she is on the Right, besides supporting free speech.

Edited: I had "reason" and 'emotion" in the wrong places.

Marc said...

It's no longer possible to delete one's duplicate comments, I guess; I wonder when Blogger did that.

farmgirl said...

What about Truth?
That’s mighty rich of her.

Jupiter said...

"Has Dowd been watching this trial and listening to the same testimony I have? If so, her abilities of discernment could use some work."

Dude, figure it out. Amber Heard has a vagina! So of course she is telling the Truth.

Ann Althouse said...

“ It's no longer possible to delete one's duplicate comments, I guess; I wonder when Blogger did that.”

If you’re not seeing the trash can, click to “post a comment,” and I think you will.

Saint Croix said...

she's fanatical in her support for abortion and gay marriage

Althouse is not fanatical.

One of her sons is gay, I think, so of course she supports gay marriage. A lot of people (and churches) support gay marriage. The pastor of my church married two homosexuals.

Althouse is easy enough to define politically, if you need to. She's a classic liberal and feminist.

She believes in free speech. She thinks race discrimination is wrong. I do not believe she supports CRT and I know she thinks indoctrinating children is awful.

Even though Althouse is not a practicing Christian anymore, she has the utmost respect for Jesus and she continually practices loving her enemies. (She does it better than I do!)

If Althouse was "fanatical" on abortion rights, as you say, she would not post stuff like this or this or this or this or this or this or this.

Gator said...

I think most people agree Johnny Depp is a weirdo, but Amber Heard might literally be the worst person in the world. She was caught perjuring under oath, and no WaPo and the NYT are not credible journalistic sources. Haven't been for over 20 years.

Rusty said...

"It's heavily weighted to one side, though, Robert Cook. Studies Have Shown (as the saying goes) that people on the Right are better at articulating the positions of the Left than vice versa."

"That certainly isn't borne out by the commenters here."

Bob. There have been countless times that the commenters here, that you don't agree with, have taken you by the hand and given you a guided tour of their reasoning. You have said,"That's bullshit." and gone about your merry way.

Robert Cook said...

"Bob. There have been countless times that the commenters here, that you don't agree with, have taken you by the hand and given you a guided tour of their reasoning. You have said,'That's bullshit.' and gone about your merry way."

Not likely. (For one, I am not one to simply reply, "That's bullshit.") Examples, please? (I don't doubt I have not been convinced by the "guided tour of their reasoning" (such as they are) that the commenters here have provided. Mostly, such "reasoning" is just reiteration of their dogma.)

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Robert Cook said...
How do you presume that Prof. Althouse is a "woman of the left?"

She voted for Obama, and said so. If she's ever voted for a GOP President, I've missed her saying so

She mentioned back when she was getting rid of comments that she wasn't getting the commentaries she wanted, because her comment section was almost entirely right wing, and the people of the Left stayed away.

There was a strong implication, if not an outright statement, that what she wanted was left wing commenters, not right wing ones. but the left wing ones for the most part refused to be anywhere where there were right wing ones

And, most importantly, the vast majority of her posts come from a left of center perspective. Which most of us do our best to engage with