Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:17 AM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
Which of those casual remarks is, you know... false? Bush lost the 2000 election and was awarded the presidency by Sandra Day O'Connor. The lead-up to war in 2003 was marked by obvious untruths uttered by Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, and others. Excepting Powell and Rice, how well did non-male-Caucasians fare during Bush II? Redneck idiot? He was worse than that. He was a lesser scion in an inherited political dynasty who pretended to be a redneck - who it seems certain did escape wartime service through family influence. Etc...

The difference, which you fail to make clear, between Bush and Obama is that the complaints about Bush had, for the most part, a factual basis.
Jeff...these are not arguments but nothing more than lefty proclamation.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:21 AM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
Hmm....fair enough. I didn't know a lot of those details. I don't so much care about the work that Hezbollah does in terms of huminatarianism in the region, Hamas does the same thing. I wouldn't necessarily say that it's sheer cyncism on their part in order to create goodwill towards them in the region, but I think that's definitely part of it. And some aid to people in the region on their part doesn't tip the moral calculus in their favor.

The individual argument about the guy is stronger. I can see why his stance on women's rights is something worth noting. But I'm still guessing he holds positions you and I find disturbing or repulsive. (I'm not 100% on this, but it seems unlikely that this isn't the case since I assume he is a member of Hezbollah for a reason) And if he is truly is a moderate reformer type of guy, why is he throwing in his hat with a lot like Hezbollah? Surely he should know what kind of a group that is. I think the bottom line is that this is a situation that is far too complicated to be handled on twitter, and she shouldn't have commented without context. I now mostly agree with you that it doesn't warrant a firing, but it was certainly thoughtless.
I'd say that assuming somebody from the region would draw the same conclusions as a Western outsider in regard to "what kind of a group that is" is unlikely to be correct, at best. But, otherwise, I'm more in agreement with what you say in the second graf than not. I would back away from asserting that she ought not to have "commented without context." I'd say a reasonable response to such a comment would have been for her employer to explicitly ask for clarification, if they really felt that somebody whom they'd apparently trusted for a long time was saying something unsupportable.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:30 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
[...]

The individual argument about the guy is stronger. I can see why his stance on women's rights is something worth noting. But I'm still guessing he holds positions you and I find disturbing or repulsive. (I'm not 100% on this, but it seems unlikely that this isn't the case since I assume he is a member of Hezbollah for a reason)
Oh, I'm sure he does. And if you read Nasr's post, you'll see that she doesn't see him as having been good across the board, either.

Quote:
And if he is truly is a moderate reformer type of guy, why is he throwing in his hat with a lot like Hezbollah? Surely he should know what kind of a group that is.
Two possibilities come to mind:

(1) Overton Window -- the range of mainstream-acceptable discourse in that part of the world probably does not line up perfectly with our range here in the US/Western world. It might be a fairly edgy thing for a cleric to say, over there, that not only should men not abuse women, but that's it's against Islamic law to do so.

(2) It's the only game in town. If you want to work within the system where you live, you don't get to require that the group you pick to align yourself have no views you dislike. Or if you do, you get nowhere.

Or, if I stop giving him the benefit of the doubt, it could also just be that he agrees with what Hezbollah seeks on most planks, and just has this one area where he's not in step with the party line. By the same reasoning, I can admire (an aspect of) a hardcore social conservative who thinks we should be doing something about greenhouse gas emissions, say.

Quote:
I think the bottom line is that this is a situation that is far too complicated to be handled on twitter, and she shouldn't have commented without context.
Hmmm, probably. It's hard to say what is and isn't appropriate for Twitter these days, because it's such a rapidly shifting aspect of our discourse. But for someone in her position, at least at this moment, and commenting on something she ought to have known would be touchy at the very least? Yeah: not smart.

Quote:
I now mostly agree with you that it doesn't warrant a firing, but it was certainly thoughtless.
Guess we can leave it there.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 07-08-2010 at 10:35 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:35 AM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

If Frum were a "squish" he'd be marching along merrily with all of the other kooks...the guy has been on my shit list for years for various and sundry policy positions - dating back to that wacky "Axis of Evil" conflation - but he's got serious balls and has proven himself capable of an intellectual honesty that I'll admit has surprised me. Most on the Right who revile him are the "squishes" and weaklings lacking a moral or intellectual center - run-with-the-pack losers enjoying the self-absorption of their comfy cult.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:45 AM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucds View Post
If Frum were a "squish" he'd be marching along merrily with all of the other kooks...the guy has been on my shit list for years for various and sundry policy positions - dating back to that wacky "Axis of Evil" conflation - but he's got serious balls and has proven himself capable of an intellectual honesty that I'll admit has surprised me. Most on the Right who revile him are the "squishes" and weaklings lacking a moral or intellectual center - run-with-the-pack losers enjoying the self-absorption of their comfy cult.
I couldn't have said it better. If more people on the Right had Frum's intellectual courage, that side would be far more formidable than it currently is. I don't love his policy ideas, and "Axis of Evil" is something he should be ashamed of; but, casting him, and people like him, into the darkness is among the dumbest behaviors of a movement that seems to have a real affinity for stupidity.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:56 AM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
I couldn't have said it better. If more people on the Right had Frum's intellectual courage, that side would be far more formidable than it currently is. I don't love his policy ideas, and "Axis of Evil" is something he should be ashamed of; but, casting him, and people like him, into the darkness is among the dumbest behaviors of a movement that seems to have a real affinity for stupidity.
(Just anticipating somebody's "AHA!" moment.) I see no contradiction between the above, and the below:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
Who said "the right is stupid?" Not me, certainly. "Worse?" Not "The Right." Rather the current right-wing media complex - AM radio, FoxNews, the Rightosphere." There are simple ways to measure intellectual honesty. Sourcing. Taking care to have a factual basis for what you say. Avoiding repugnant rhetoric. Responding to criticism. Demonstrating respect for your opponents. etc... Those particular media do not stand as exemplars of any of those values.

Just because I'm convinced that Rush and Breitbart are opportunistic self-regarding blowhards doesn't mean I believe that about every conservative (or even most). So, to repeat the question, who are we talking about?
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 07-08-2010, 11:12 AM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

AemJeff - I think that your use of the word "movement" narrows the focus. "Movement conservatives" are a group that do, indeed, have an affinity for stupidity, or something that looks an awful lot like it. That Frum was bounced from AEI for his lack of committment is telling. I could be wrong, but I doubt that any liberal think tank would oust a guy with Frum's credentials for contrarian views (or as the public charge was framed, being prolific from his house rather than his office.) Bruce Bartlett, another credentialed, intellectually credible conservative who commits the crime of saying things the Right doesn't want to hear, was also bounced from a "conservative" think tank. I believe that on the current version of the Right, the "movement" concept - i.e. a certain degree of ideological lockstep - is in full force across a fairly broad spectrum, including the big institutions like AEI, firmed up by the partisan agenda to take back the Beltway, kook activism and opportunistic blowhards on FOX and talk radio.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 07-08-2010, 11:31 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default tangentially ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
I think the bottom line is that this is a situation that is far too complicated to be handled on twitter, ...
Tell it to the RNC.

__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 07-08-2010, 12:27 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: On a related note ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjkeefe View Post
It's possible Nasr was on thin ice for unrelated reasons, and this was either a last straw or a convenient excuse, of course. But on the surface of it, Jesus fucking Christ seems the only thing to say.
Increasingly it appears that Americans must walk on eggshells for fear of saying anything even mildly upsetting or offensive to Israel or its supporters. (CNN's quick action was clearly taken to quell the rising shitstorm of rage that had already started to issue in torrents from the wingnut collective.)

Balloon Juice posted a small segment of Nasr's explanation for her "unforgivable" tweet:
Quote:
I used the words “respect” and “sad” because to me as a Middle Eastern woman, Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman’s rights. He called for the abolition of the tribal system of “honor killing.” He called the practice primitive and non-productive. He warned Muslim men that abuse of women was against Islam.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 07-08-2010, 01:00 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: On a related note ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
[...] (CNN's quick action was clearly taken to quell the rising shitstorm of rage that had already started to issue in torrents from the wingnut collective.) [...]
You rang?


(Above: a bit happier today)

Quote:
Bozell Statement on CNN Firing Nasr: Step in the Right Direction

Editor's Note: What follows is a statement NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell released earlier this evening upon learning that CNN had fired its senior editor of Mideast affairs Octavia Nasr, who had expressed via her Twitter account sadness at the death of a Hezbollah terrorist leader whom she "respect[ed] a lot."

CNN has finally taken a step in the right direction in removing a terrorist sympathizer from their ranks. It’s a shame it took this amount of publicity and attention from organizations like the MRC to get the job done, as Octavia Nasr should never have been granted the position of authority to begin with. Unfortunately, CNN will have to deal with the consequences of how this affects their integrity and a growing public distrust of how they cover Islamic terrorism, but they took the right step in firing her.
(For those new to the scene, MRC is the Media Research Center, the parent group of Newsbusters. It is also run by Bozo.)

The second link in the blockquote is to their collection of posts about Nasr. Here's the picture they used to illustrate one of them, which was posted yesterday.



Subtle, huh?
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 07-08-2010 at 01:05 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 07-08-2010, 02:57 PM
popcorn_karate popcorn_karate is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,644
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkibong View Post
hmmm...i'm thinking your vote might cancel mine out.
probably. a couple things to think about:

1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkibong View Post
He stresses environmental “sustainability.”
nice scare quotes. sustainability is such a joke of a concept, right? hahaha stupid hippies!

2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkibong View Post
More than a decade of Democratic governance has left the state’s economy in shambles. Unemployment is stuck at 10.8 percent, well above the national average.
oregon does not appear on the list of states with a Statistically Significant departure from the national average according to the BLS - so you are being misleading there. and of course you continue with the dishonest spin by attributing the insignificant difference to democratic governance with no factual basis (i.e. look at historic unemployment rates of oregon vs. the nation and you will find that you are peddling bullshit)

3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkibong View Post
Environmental regulations have decimated the logging industry.
no, that is not really the story. There were major declines in employment due largely to automation and technological progress in the 70's and early '80s. This combined with the advent of raw log exports which further cut employment of mill workers.

environmental restrictions did play a part also, but the industry was drastically changing anyway, and environmentalists were used a convenient scape goat by the industry. there was no way to continue to cut at the level they had previously - the big trees were simply gone. the impact of environmental regs was to speed up the process so we didn't have to wait until the loggers completed the tragedy of the commons exercise in which they were engaged.


you come off as a republican talking point spewing carpetbagger with no understanding of Oregon or its history - but otherwise it is a well written piece, you should be proud of your craftsmanship.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 07-08-2010, 03:11 PM
popcorn_karate popcorn_karate is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,644
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkibong View Post
hmmm...i'm thinking your vote might cancel mine out.
also, sorry for being nasty.

I have some sensitivity about what i consider to be misrepresentations of issues i care deeply about.

I appreciate your equanimity.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 07-08-2010, 03:35 PM
Lyle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Hitler built the autobahn and made the trains run on time, and loved Germany... so the fuck what, right?

edit: This guy may be more like Rudolf Hess, the Nazi who wanted Peace with Great Britain. Let me post tweet his death in prison years after the war, "Sad to hear of the passing of Rudolf Hess.. One of the Nazi giants I respect a lot. #Germany".

Here's one for Albert Speer upon his death, "Sad to hear of the passing of Albert Speer.. One of Nazi Germany's giants I respect a lot. #Germany". And probably a lot of people who knew who Albert Speer was, probably respected Albert Speer's accomplishments.

I'm actually sympathetic to Nasr, she came across fair minded for the most part... although CNN has been affected by, if not her and other Middle Eastern colleagues, the ideas of Ms. Amanpour who arguably is biased in her coverage now and her authority seems to play on the minds of the news readers at CNN who don't know any better than what Ms. Amanpour tells them... or whoever tells them. Merely conjecture and opinion on my part though.

edit-2: This reminds me of Paul Shirley's firing by ESPN over comments he made about Haiti the week after the earthquake there.

Last edited by Lyle; 07-08-2010 at 04:20 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 07-08-2010, 03:59 PM
nikkibong nikkibong is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,803
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by popcorn_karate View Post
probably. a couple things to think about:

1)

nice scare quotes. sustainability is such a joke of a concept, right? hahaha stupid hippies!
The "scare quotes" are meant to point to Kitzhaber's vagueness on the issue. What does he mean by "sustainability?" As it stands, he's doing little more than deploy a trendy buzzword for electoral purposes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by popcorn_karate View Post
2)

oregon does not appear on the list of states with a Statistically Significant departure from the national average according to the BLS - so you are being misleading there. and of course you continue with the dishonest spin by attributing the insignificant difference to democratic governance with no factual basis (i.e. look at historic unemployment rates of oregon vs. the nation and you will find that you are peddling bullshit)
All that I asserted was that Oregon's unemployment rate is well-above the national average. That's a fact: 10.8% versus 9.5%. (And, as you know, through much of last year, Oregon's was hovering between second and third worst in the nation.) But that's not even the most relevant statistic. We should be examining Oregon's economic performance relative to that of similar states. Washington is the obvious comparison: the jobless rate there is 8.7%. Idaho's is 9.1%. Other than that, I was pointing out that the last two recessions happened under Democratic governors; Kitzhaber, and Kulongoski.

Quote:
Originally Posted by popcorn_karate View Post
3)

no, that is not really the story. There were major declines in employment due largely to automation and technological progress in the 70's and early '80s. This combined with the advent of raw log exports which further cut employment of mill workers.

environmental restrictions did play a part also, but the industry was drastically changing anyway, and environmentalists were used a convenient scape goat by the industry. there was no way to continue to cut at the level they had previously - the big trees were simply gone. the impact of environmental regs was to speed up the process so we didn't have to wait until the loggers completed the tragedy of the commons exercise in which they were engaged.
Thanks for conceding that environmental regulations played a part. I readily admit that there were other contributing factors.


Quote:
Originally Posted by popcorn_karate View Post
you come off as a republican talking point spewing carpetbagger with no understanding of Oregon or its history -
Well, I've only lived here for five years. When do I get to become a Real Oregonian™, pk_palin?

Quote:
Originally Posted by popcorn_karate View Post
but otherwise it is a well written piece, you should be proud of your craftsmanship.
Same goes for your post.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 07-08-2010, 04:00 PM
osmium osmium is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: new yorkistan
Posts: 708
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

(for the jaw jaw coffeehouse)

RE
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 07-08-2010, 04:28 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Hezbollah is exactly the kind of group that American conservatives would flock to if they were born Lebanese Muslim. All the broad attitudes of a group like Hezbollah line up almost perfectly with the attitudes of the extremist wing (also the dominant wing) of the Republican Party: both are authoritarian, both want to impose a strict religious doctrine on the population, both favor aggressive rejection of foreign interference and influence in their cultures and societies, both are quick to resort to war and violence to solve their problems, and on and on and on. What has earned Hezbollah a reputation as "terrorist" is the kind of action "defending Lebanese and Arab sovereignty" that American conservatives would be among the first to support were they themselves Lebanese Muslims. (And which action they support enthusiastically when it is their own side -- Israel or the US -- doing it. In this very forum, the most vociferous enemy of Arab and Muslim people has also, repeatedly, cheered (literally) the killing of innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan by coalition forces.)

Now, to be fair, I do realize there are still a few people who have a strong emotional attachment to the Republican Party as it was constituted several decades ago. A couple of the forum's conservatives in recent days and weeks mentioned that they still remember (fondly) what the Republicans were like in the middle of the last century. (It's not clear to me if these posters really understand how fundamentally and drastically the Republican Party has transformed into a proto-fascist party in the intervening decades.)

There is another set of our fellow citizens who really don't follow politics too closely and don't really have much of a clue what is going on, politically, either in the US or in the world.

So, it's not fair to compare these two groups of Republicans to Hezbollah. But the active, engaged, and aware members of today's ultraconservative movement are cut from a different cloth and bear a different level of responsibility for their reprehensible associations, having joined a movement with full awareness of its wretched standing as a party of hatred and intolerance.

Last edited by TwinSwords; 07-08-2010 at 04:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 07-08-2010, 04:38 PM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkibong View Post
...

Same goes for your post.

Nice job bong bong! First Hot Air then TWS. Next time we see you on Apollo can we expect a picture of Reagan hanging behind you.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 07-08-2010, 04:57 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Real Oregonian Test:
Who said " Ya gotta make your free throws" often referring to the candidate in question?

Just yankin' your chain... I've got 53 years in and the Californication process was over before anyone even coined the term... welcome to Northernmost California. You qualify as a long term resident.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a good thing. Most the ones who gripe the most here cashed in big time on the "invasion".
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 07-08-2010, 04:59 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

A: Bill Schonely
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 07-08-2010, 07:15 PM
tom tom is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 67
Default Re: Bush Family and Nazis

As I've said a few times now, by "influential" I did not mean to indicate Democratic politicians, but voters.
I'm relying largely on anecdotal evidence - I knew many people who said they could never vote Republican again after seeing that movie - so I don't have a great case to make here; the question is an empirical one and I just don't know the facts. (Moore used to cite some poll saying that 98% (?) of viewers indicated they would vote against Bush after seeing F911, but there are at least a few reasons why his claim wouldn't settle this dispute.)

Quote:
More to the point, Bush won in 2004 more convincingly than he won in 2000. ...Therefore, I don't buy your view that Moore had any real influence, even at the height of his popularity, nor do I accept that the movie itself did anything more than get those already in the choir to sing a little louder.
This is a reasonable position, and it may well be the correct one, but I don't find your argument to be especially convincing. That Bush ought to have lost but didn't is, at best, weak evidence for the claim that his margin of victory wouldn't have been even larger without F911.

Anyway:
1. I'm happy to be agnostic on the question of "influence"
2. Much of your post makes the case that, whatever influence Moore had on the electorate, there's a dis-analogy between Moore ('04, or now) and the current role that right wing media figures play. You're right, but again, that's a point I've explicitly made myself a few times in this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 07-08-2010, 07:15 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle View Post
Hitler built the autobahn and made the trains run on time, and loved Germany... so the fuck what, right?
Uh... the "train" example may be construed by some as in bad taste, just FYI.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 07-08-2010, 07:27 PM
ImmRefDotCom ImmRefDotCom is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 35
Default All About Weigel

He wasn't really covering conservatives, he was just going after the powerless freaks (or what the establishment thinks of as freaks). He never took on anyone with any power and in fact before the WaPo he worked for the Soros/Rockefeller-funded TWI and before then he worked for the Kochtopus' own Reason Mag. At the latter establishment, I used to point out that the only public figure he'd dared ask a tough question of was Larry Sinclair, and that continued to hold true during his TWI and WaPo years (er, months).

And, his WaPo gig was actually better for his opponents because he was more constrained there than elsewhere; he's probably going to be able to do more damage to the 'partiers at MSNBC (even if only a few dozen people watch it).

For more, see my posts about Dave Weigel, which go back to 2006:

1. He's repeatedly misled about one issue in particular, but it happens to be an issue that the establishment has also repeatedly misled about so you won't hear about that from anyone else. Yet, if - unlike Weigel - you endeavor to understand my point and the difference between evidence and proof, you'll see that he's misled about the facts of that matter.

2. He wrote about me on his personal site and then refused to approve a comment I left pointing out how he's wrong. Yes, he's that low.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 07-08-2010, 07:36 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: All About Weigel

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmRefDotCom View Post
He wasn't really covering conservatives, he was just going after the powerless freaks (or what the establishment thinks of as freaks). He never took on anyone with any power...
You mean powerless freaks like Rush or Palin?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/rig...ves_elton.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/rig...unprofess.html

I detect a personal grudge.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 07-08-2010, 08:41 PM
cragger cragger is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 632
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Nor was it Hitler whom the myth holds "made the trains run on time". But then some rants are tasks for which facts need not apply.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 07-08-2010, 08:48 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cragger View Post
Nor was it Hitler whom the myth holds "made the trains run on time". But then some rants are tasks for which facts need not apply.
Well said.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 07-08-2010, 09:01 PM
JonIrenicus JonIrenicus is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,606
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucds View Post
...

Read what I wrote again and think about it before you type. You made a false, straw-man claim that criticism of Bush/Cheney's WMD bullshit as a "lie" was predicated on the notion that they KNEW there were no WMDs and claimed there were. Try using the old noggin and recognize that it's ALSO a lie if you claim certain knowledge when you don't actually have it. I don't believe Bush/Cheney KNEW there were no "WMDs" threatening US national security, but I know from the extensive historical record that now exists they KNEW their evidence was selective and not definitive, i.e. they knew they were making a misleading impression. ...
Now there you have something more reasonable. I completely agree that they were obfuscating the rationales for invading Iraq, that even without weapons or a direct link to some larger terrorist threat Bush still wanted to go in and force regime change. That that rationale was never fleshed out by them, that agents of the government let a link between the larger terrorist problem blend in with the rationale for invading Iraq. My claim was very narrow, that people making the charge that Bush did not actually believe Iraq had wmd, and said they did anyway, is false. He did not lie in that way, and people claim he did.

And I'll repeat it again, I think the rationale to invade Iraq for wmd just wasn't a very good reason to invade that country. I have a video from years ago that fleshes some of this out, going to go find it and post it.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 07-08-2010, 09:46 PM
JonIrenicus JonIrenicus is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,606
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Ok, just finished uploading an old clip from Bill Mahers real time show. This was BEFORE Bill completely turned against the war, he rejected the wmd angle even here, but for a brief moment in time, Bill Maher, ultra liberal flirted with support for the same reason that got me on board as a rationale.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ybEWhQQ6JE


It is a good clip as it touches on several ideas and rationales for justifying the war.

Now bill rejected this as Iraq went downward because the effects of the regime change seemed like a complete failure, and people like Beinart are still opposed despite some earlier sympathy for this rationale. But I do think it is useful to see this flesh out a bit more, as it is here.

Some liberals would be completely on board with such things, if they thought they worked, while others are against it because they think it cannot work, and because the act in and of itself was wrong whether it works or not.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:05 PM
brucds brucds is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 940
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

"Now there you have something more reasonable."

But that's all I said in the first post - there was no basis for claiming dispositive knowledge, but that claim was being made. That the CIA guy, whose name I forget, enabled this process is no excuse. The real evidence that a "hyped" rationale was being deliberately pieced together and promoted from flimsy "intelligence" I would base on what we know about the activities and known biases of Cheney's group.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:25 PM
ImmRefDotCom ImmRefDotCom is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 35
Default Re: All About Weigel

1. Obviously, I'm not a Weigel fan. When he first joined Reason I tried to get him to actually fight the power; instead he quickly revealed himself to be just a hack.

2. Rush and Palin do have power and can get things done. However, the type of power I referred to - the type that Weigel refuses to take on - is establishment (including Beltway) power.

Any old hack - like Weigel - feels free to criticize Palin or Rush because they know they aren't going to get pushback from those who cut their checks.

However, you'll never find Weigel doing things like this or asking even just one of the many other questions I've since come up with for others. He won't do things like that because he knows what would happen: he'd wind up working in a gas station.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:32 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: All About Weigel

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmRefDotCom View Post
... he's probably going to be able to do more damage to the 'partiers at MSNBC (even if only a few dozen people watch it).
Translation: I am so filled with hate that I no longer care whether my sentences are internally consistent.

Quote:
2. He wrote about me on his personal site and then refused to approve a comment I left pointing out how he's wrong. Yes, he's that low.
Translation: It turns out it IS possible to be more self-absorbed than Ann Althouse. Who knew?
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:47 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: All About Weigel

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmRefDotCom View Post
Any old hack - like Weigel - feels free to criticize Palin or Rush because they know they aren't going to get pushback from those who cut their checks.
Yeah, that Weigel, he knows nothing about pushback from his employer for the crime of "feeling free to criticize" conservatives.

And what a travesty, huh? A writer who feels perfectly free to criticize conservatives. What could be more wrong? Doesn't Weigel know this is America?
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:52 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: All About Weigel

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmRefDotCom View Post
He wrote about me on his personal site and then refused to approve a comment I left pointing out how he's wrong. Yes, he's that low.
Here's that post of Weigel's: http://daveweigel.com/?p=2072

(Evidently.)
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 07-08-2010, 11:00 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: All About Weigel

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
Here's that post of Weigel's: http://daveweigel.com/?p=2072

(Evidently.)
Lets just take a look at Dave's sin against our friend here (evidently):

Quote:
I don’t want to pollute the WIndy with his nonsense, but as a way of explaining: I called Hawaii back in November when I started writing longer pieces about the Obama Birthers. They pointed me to this 10/31 statement:

Quote:
Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.
Literate people read this as “we have Barack Obama’s birth certificate.” Lonewacko/Chris Kelly/24Ahead reads this as “we have a document that MAY INDEED SAY THAT OBAMA WAS BORN IN KENYA.” It’s the stupidest argument I’ve dealt with in my mini-career in the Obama Birtherverse, and I’ve dealt with some high-grade stupid shit. Lonewacko/24Ahead’s evidence that… uh, that Hawaiian bureaucrats don’t mean “birth certificate” when they say “birth certificate,” and instead mean “certification of live birth in foreign country,” is that one of the bureaucrats blew him off. Hell, who wouldn’t blow him off?
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 07-08-2010, 11:15 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
I don't feel sorry for the conservative movement, but thanks for your concern.
But it is interesting, don't you think, that conservatives have so perfected their self-concept as victims that literally no matter what the WaPo does, they are exhibiting "liberal media bias?" When the WaPo didn't have someone covering conservatives, and when they did, it "proved" their bias and further reinforced your movement's self-concept as a bunch of pitiable victims.

Hey, it works! Do what works! Feeling all sorry for yourselves and acting like a bunch of abused children has been hugely effective at rallying the Republican base. I hope you at least stop and smell the flowers once in a while, though. You've piled up a lot of accomplishments in the last ten years, from killing a bunch of innocent women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan, to undermining the American middle class, to enriching the rich, to freeing corporations from the burden of regulation, to packing the judiciary with radical conservative extremists (to name but a few of your accomplishments!), conservatives have an enormous record they can be proud of. And it's only a matter of time before you get back in power and can continue the program uninterrupted, with even greater vigor than before.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 07-08-2010, 11:46 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

Quote:
Originally Posted by osmium View Post
Made me think of this, for some reason.

[Added] A cover of the above, with much better fidelity.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 07-08-2010 at 11:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 07-08-2010, 11:58 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: All About Weigel

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
Here's that post of Weigel's: http://daveweigel.com/?p=2072

(Evidently.)
Worth noting for the record, from that:

Quote:
Lonewacko/Chris Kelly/24Ahead
Although you gotta figure someone who gives himself the name "Lonewacko" is about on par with someone who declares himself victor in an online exchange.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 07-09-2010, 12:04 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Bush Family and Nazis

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom View Post
As I've said a few times now, by "influential" I did not mean to indicate Democratic politicians, but voters.
I'm relying largely on anecdotal evidence - I knew many people who said they could never vote Republican again after seeing that movie - so I don't have a great case to make here; the question is an empirical one and I just don't know the facts. (Moore used to cite some poll saying that 98% (?) of viewers indicated they would vote against Bush after seeing F911, but there are at least a few reasons why his claim wouldn't settle this dispute.)
Including, it hardly needs saying, the reason that overwhelmingly, the only people who would go see a MM movie would be people who wouldn't have voted for Bush before seeing the movie.

Quote:
This is a reasonable position, and it may well be the correct one, but I don't find your argument to be especially convincing. That Bush ought to have lost but didn't is, at best, weak evidence for the claim that his margin of victory wouldn't have been even larger without F911.
I didn't make an argument. I made an assertion, based on my memory of how things felt back then. I am not interested in making an argument about something so moot.

Quote:
Anyway:
1. I'm happy to be agnostic on the question of "influence"
2. Much of your post makes the case that, whatever influence Moore had on the electorate, there's a dis-analogy between Moore ('04, or now) and the current role that right wing media figures play. You're right, but again, that's a point I've explicitly made myself a few times in this thread.
Okay. Sounds good.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 07-09-2010, 12:19 AM
Unit Unit is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,713
Default Re: Special Unemployment Edition (Dave Weigel & David Frum)

The problem I have with the "all knowledgeable people think we needed TARP"-line is that the whole legal framework that produced the meltdown was designed and endorsed by those same "knowledgeable" folks.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 07-09-2010, 02:56 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default All About ImmRefDotCom

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmRefDotCom View Post
However, you'll never find Weigel doing things like this or asking even just one of the many other questions I've since come up with for others.
By the way, no need to do so much self-promotion in this heat. I mean, it's not like you're not already being noticed.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 07-09-2010, 03:16 AM
rfrobison rfrobison is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 1,629
Default Re: Bush Family and Nazis

Quote:
Originally Posted by uncle ebeneezer View Post
I would add an obvious question: when has anyone with real power in the Democratic Party ever had to apologize to Keith Olberman, Michael Moore, etc., or retract/change their positions to stay on their good side?
Well, I've been wanting to tell the Republicans to give Rush and the gang the bum's rush for years, but nobody's taking my calls at the RNC.

There's two ways of looking at it from the perspective of someone who's left of center: On the one hand you should be ecstatic that the Republican party is being held hostage by these pundit/entertainers because they make the pols look like spineless idiots. On the other hand, if one believes the key to a healthy democracy is a vibrant and serious opposition to keep the party in power honest, it could be a problem.

It's funny in a train-wreck-watching sort of way to see people on the left simultaneously work themselves into a tizzy over Limbaugh's latest pronouncement AND gleefully declare that this means the death of the Republicans.

For my part, I'd pay good money to have just about any Republican with national stature to tell these folks to stick it where the sun don't shine. Not only would it be healthy, it might even win them a few elections.

I'm not holding my breath, though.
__________________
Send lawyers, guns and money/Dad, get me outta this
--Warren Zevon--

Last edited by rfrobison; 07-09-2010 at 03:51 AM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.