Jules Crittenden nails it in noting “the unlikelihood that any effort to present a serious book entitled Great American Hypocrites, entirely limited to one side of the aisle, could be anything but an exercise in hypocrisy.” But Jonah Goldberg overstates it in suggesting that the Internet’s most infamous sock-puppeteer is “one of the most easily and profitably ignored voices in the blogosphere.” Ellensburg’s raging paranoia makes him a useful case study of how Bush Derangement Syndrome eventually metastasizes into a loathing of the Democratic leadership and the establishment media, which is what ultimately marginalizes him.
Crittenden and Goldberg both link to Dean Barnett’s review of the book, which is that the book is exactly what you would expect — the occasional insight, overwhelmed by dishonest Leftist cliches and ad hominem attacks.
However, PW regulars will love this part of Barnett’s review, starting with Ellensburg’s attack on John Wayne:
You’ll want to take special note of Greenwald’s none-too-subtle code language that has the Duke “flamboyantly parading.” Throughout “Great American Hypocrites,” neocons and other Republicans are reliably “prancing” or perambulating in some less than manful way.
One wonders whether Ellensburg was writing these passages at the same time he was having a hissy fit going ballistic over Peggy Noonan’s use of the word “poof” as a verb. Because I think there is a word for that.
(h/t Memeorandum.)
Update: HotAir-lanche!
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 11:33 am #
Heh. Indeed.
Comment by Sean Bannion on 4/16 @ 11:33 am #
Does the word begin with the letter “H” and rhyme with “hematocrit.”
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 11:39 am #
As long as they’re not flamboyantly prancing while balls deep in a cabana boy with socks on both hands and simultaneously pounding a keyboard, I’m OK with it.
Comment by JohnAnnArbor on 4/16 @ 11:47 am #
Such poofy prose.
Comment by Ardsgaine on 4/16 @ 12:00 pm #
I don’t think Goldberg overstates it. I’ve profited immensely from ignoring Greenwald, and would never hear of him at all if you guys didn’t enjoy poking him with sharp sticks. :)
Comment by SGT Ted on 4/16 @ 12:16 pm #
So, Ellisberg is a sort of self loathing fag? NTTAWWT.
Pingback by Jules Crittenden » Mediocre American Hypocrite on 4/16 @ 12:24 pm #
[...] at Protein Wisdom cruelly observes more hypocrisy. Yeah. No [...]
Comment by PCachu on 4/16 @ 12:26 pm #
Yeah, I was gonna say, I didn’t know “methinkstheladydothprotesttoomuch” was a word.
Comment by mojo on 4/16 @ 12:26 pm #
I think he means “pouf”, a French term meaning Le Fagout.
Pingback by PoliGazette » Greenwald and Hypocrisy on 4/16 @ 12:55 pm #
[...] Karl: However, PW regulars will love this part of Barnett’s review, starting with Ellensburg’s attack on John Wayne: You’ll want to take special note of Greenwald’s none-too-subtle code language that has the Duke “flamboyantly parading.†Throughout “Great American Hypocrites,†neocons and other Republicans are reliably “prancing†or perambulating in some less than manful way. [...]
Comment by JohnAnnArbor on 4/16 @ 1:00 pm #
Prissy prat preens poofy prose for publication.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 1:06 pm #
You got Instalanched, too, Karl.
Comment by Wind Rider on 4/16 @ 1:08 pm #
Oh, you meanie, meanie…meanies! Running roughshod, nay bareback, over such a sensitive soul…
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 1:11 pm #
An Army Of Strawmen
Comment by JohnAnnArbor on 4/16 @ 1:32 pm #
Imagine being his editor.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 1:39 pm #
When Socky Ellers McCabana, the artiste specializing in Brazilian jooo-shitpoo, starts flapping his gums, I cannot help but laugh at him. I feel like such a horrible person for doing so. It was like when Corky and his band played a concert at my daughter’s school. I had to excuse myself. I am bad. I denounce myself.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 1:44 pm #
I think he means “poufâ€Â, a French term meaning Le Fagout.
I actually googled that, just to see.
Comment by BJTexs TW/BP on 4/16 @ 1:45 pm #
ANTI-SEMITE!!!!
Comment by mr bigstuff on 4/16 @ 1:50 pm #
to all the fools who voted for w………..twice,
1.marion morrison, aka john wayne was the epitome of hypocrisy. he said of WW2: “it was the greatest thing that ever happened to my career”. you see, he avoided service while the real actors went off to war which allowed him to sponge up all the major roles from 1942-1945. he established that fine republican tradition of avoiding service and then running that big mouth about how much ass “we” should kick. to refute that statement please bring up dwight d. eisenhower as evidence. but remember his final words before leaving office: “beware the rise of the military industrial complex controlled by oil men from texas”. also, your boy duke had an agent that followed in his drunken path paying off all the people whose homes and property were damaged in his drunk driving rampages.
2. watch those gay inferences and references. the current edition of the republican party is a haven for closeted gay men. larry craig, mark foley, and lindsey graham sure give your party a sweet cute little frilly look. the alleged administration of w the moron was the first to see the white house visited by a gay male prostitute, jeff gannon. more than 100 times. who do you think enjoyed those visits more? w, rove or those sissy press secretaries, fleischer and mcclellan. the smart money’s on w.
3. how bout your boy w’s recent statement that the next attack will come from afghanistan or pakistan. what a leader. he accomplished absolutely nothing in afghanistan. nothing. he couldn’t even catch bin laden because the fool decided to invade iraq and now the next attack will come from afghanistan or pakistan. can you morons do anything right? of course not. this fool w is going to be the first “president” to lose two wars. what part of miserable failure do you not understand? all the efforts and lost lives and limbs of americas finest and bravest are all for naught because of w’s failed (understatement) alleged leadership. hell, that idiot would coach the new england patriots to 0-16 rcord.
4. thanks for the $4/gallon gasoline and the worst economy since 1929 which was of course brought to us by guess who? a republican.
5. what happened to all those w stickers on the back windshields of your gas guzzlers?
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 1:56 pm #
6. w stole all the shift keys and enter buttons.
7. please ignore the liberal hypocrisy in point number 2
Comment by cranky-d on 4/16 @ 1:58 pm #
8. im a little(okay alot) high right now so pardon the rambling ignorance.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 1:59 pm #
And here I thought W was too stupid to possibly be able to do something as difficult as wrecking the economy.
Hard to keep those tinfoil-leftie talking points sorted out, these days.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/16 @ 2:01 pm #
He did *not* say that. He said, “Beware idiots who can’t punctuate, but most certainly can bloviate.”
Comment by melkor on 4/16 @ 2:03 pm #
What did Dean Wormer say to Bluto, uhh, Bigstuff?
Fat, stupid and angry is no way to go through life, son.
Comment by Salt Lick on 4/16 @ 2:12 pm #
Beware idiots who can’t punctuate…
Probably a one-handed typing effort, Rob; they’re usually masturbating to intensify the BDS high.
Comment by mr. pigstuff on 4/16 @ 2:14 pm #
9. i’m typing one-handed because my other hand is in my pants stroking my tumescent penis, thrilled that i am taking on all these wingnuts 10. oops, gotta go
Comment by kelly on 4/16 @ 2:15 pm #
Great minds, SL, great minds.
Comment by maggie katzen on 4/16 @ 2:21 pm #
ah, the old “Republicans hate gays, but I’m going to call them all gay as an insult”.
BECAUSE OF THE HYPOCRISY!!!!
I’m not proud.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 2:24 pm #
9. i’m typing one-handed because my other hand is in my pants stroking my tumescent penis, thrilled that i am taking on all these wingnuts 10. oops, gotta go
ha ha haha ha.
Comment by McGehee on 4/16 @ 2:30 pm #
I don’t think pigstuff needs more than a finger for the not-typing activity. Just a guess.
Comment by Salt Lick on 4/16 @ 2:36 pm #
stroking my tumescent penis
Well, next time eat the Cheetos after your fun.
Comment by royf on 4/16 @ 3:20 pm #
You know it is said that some men by huge trucks to compensate for a small, oh well you know.
I wonder why someone would call himself mr bigstuff on a blog? Anyone have any idea?
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 3:36 pm #
Mr. Innie?
Comment by McGehee on 4/16 @ 3:47 pm #
Careful.
Comment by royf on 4/16 @ 3:56 pm #
#33
LOL!!!! Hey I’ve got a 74 Bronco sport and a F-150.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 4:01 pm #
Big Jean Knight fan.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 4:19 pm #
This infantile, way-over-the-top ad hominem-fest about Greenwald is one he rightfully ignores (and would not have time for in any event), and nothing I’d post about. But for those who think he isn’t making a difference and now attracting the attention of major media and political figures, well check out Jane Hamsher:
Whether Jonah and others ignore him is just sooo irrelevant at this point. (Tho y’all manifestly do not do so.)
And about the book’s title. I copy-edited it (yes, he is verbose, and part of my job was to undo that), and he fought tooth and nail against a title with the word “hypocrite” in it, since that is not his main point. But as many authors discover, the marketing folks have the final call on titles.
His point is the decades-long narrative the GOP has successsfully peddled to the electorate as the party of moral probity and warrior courage, in contrast to a supposedly effete, cowardly, hippy-fied Democratic Party. That the GOP has been able to succeed with this narrative in light of the behavior of so many of its icons, pols and pundits must be attacked straight on, and Greenwald is a large part of the effort to make that happen.
You may now return to substantive discussions about cabana boys and the like.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 4:20 pm #
This infantile, way-over-the-top ad hominem-fest about Greenwald he rightfully ignores (and would not have time for in any event), and is nothing I’d post about. But for those who think he isn’t making a difference and now attracting the attention of major media and political figures, well check out Jane Hamsher:
Whether Jonah and others ignore him is just sooo irrelevant at this point. (Tho y’all manifestly do not do so.)
And about the book’s title. I copy-edited it (yes, he is verbose, and part of my job was to undo that), and he fought tooth and nail against a title with the word “hypocrite” in it, since that is not his main point. But as many authors discover, the marketing folks have the final call on titles.
His point is the decades-long narrative the GOP has successsfully peddled to the electorate as the party of moral probity and warrior courage, in contrast to a supposedly effete, cowardly, hippy-fied Democratic Party. That the GOP has been able to succeed with this narrative in light of the behavior of so many of its icons, pols and pundits must be attacked straight on, and Greenwald is a large part of the effort to make that happen.
You may now return to substantive discussions about cabana boys and the like.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 4:21 pm #
Sorry about the duplicate. Feel free to delete one.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:25 pm #
Thank you, Mona. I now know what it feels like to laugh uncontrollably. It would be impossible to parody you. Or is that Ellers? Or McElleson? Or any of your other identities. Don’t forget that GiGi’s drivel was read into the Senate record, and he had a meteoric rise as a blogger, and he is a mendoucheous douchenozzle, and you are pitiful, yet hysterical. Thank you for amusing me.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:27 pm #
It is even better when you double up like that, dear Mona. Now, jam your head back in your ass.
Comment by alppuccino on 4/16 @ 4:27 pm #
76 Powerwagon
Comment by alppuccino on 4/16 @ 4:29 pm #
5. what happened to all those w stickers on the back windshields of your gas guzzlers?
A back windshield would be really handy if you drove in reverse at over 25 mph. And that would burn a shitload ‘a petrol too.
Comment by Rick "Mona" O'Ellersburgwald on 4/16 @ 4:37 pm #
Greenwald only has a New York Times Best Selling Book on the Bush Administration and its abuses of power. And he has one of the most-read blogs on the Interent, after 9 months of blogging. And Senators read from his blog at Senate hearings and his posts lead to front-page news stories in major newspapers.
I’d be the first to say his style can be bombastic and he can be overly aggressive. But nobody denies that he’s very smart, and among liberal bloggers at least, very moderate and rational in his view, and unusually willing to engage debate. So it’s hard to figure out what there could be about the guy that generates such strong emotions.
I am a great admirer of Glenn Greenwald. I think he is constructively trying to direct the power of the internet into public affairs and politics. Further, having just endured the Sunday talk shows, I am affirmed in my opinion that the quality of debate is significantly higher in this blog than that offered by the TV news outfits. Putting those two things together, I think Glenn has embarked on a worthy undertaking in trying to enlist grass-roots internet support to impact politics and political changes.
You can find my comments at Glenn Greenwald’s blog, Unclaimed Territory. Mr. Greenwald, in my opinion, runs the most respectful, thoughtful, and intelligent politico-legal blog in the whole dang blogosphere.
I will add this. I believe that blogs like Mr. Greenwald’s demonstrate the awesome democratic potential of the internet. Such innovations are how we, as a united people, can proceed.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:41 pm #
Thank you, thank you, thank you, alpuccino. You have to admit that Mona, and Socky McSockersonburg did the heavy lifting here.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 4:44 pm #
I wonder how many “roughly 20″ might be. Anyway, it is nice to see that Hamsher and Greenwald’s money can buy access to Congress.
This is from Gleen’s post via Hamsher via Mona:
If we follow your tactics, gleens, won’t we too be hypocrites? All roughly 20 of us?
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 4:49 pm #
@JD and Rick
Are you seriously claiming that Greenwald also blogs under the name “Mona” at Jim Henley’s place? Well anyway, I did edit Glenn’s book, am mentioned in acknowledgments, and have the Random House-Crown 1099 to prove my work (all dutifully reported to the IRS).
That said, I wouldn’t turn down a visit from a bronzed and buffed cabana boy.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:50 pm #
Can Brazilian sock puppety cabana boyz be elected to Congress? Gigi, Mona and the Puppeteers are roughly 20 distinct people, who just coincidentally share the same IP address.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:51 pm #
Mona – Do. Not. Stop. Please. You are fucking killing me.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 4:52 pm #
Oh, is it Gleen(s)’ merkin?
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:54 pm #
Actually, maybe Mona McSockyfluffer should post that 1099. Let’s see how much cash the Left libs are wasting on socks rather than saving the world, one terrorist at a time.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:55 pm #
Dan – what is a merkin? I am afraid to google it, but must know. This is becoming more fun by the minute.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 4:57 pm #
It’s a beard out of its customary latitude.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 4:57 pm #
I googled Dirty Sanchez, Mona, and Socky once, and the mental scars, they have not healed.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 5:01 pm #
Dan, you magnificent evil bastard, you just made a piece of a bone-in ribeye attempt to exit my body via nostril.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 5:04 pm #
This is absurd. Anyone with administrative access to this site can see my email address (containing my name), as well as my IP address, which is in southwestern Michigan. I’ve been with the same IP for some three years, and have been commenting here on and off all that time.
Indeed, I’ve several times — tho not recently — exchanged email with Jeff using that email address which bears my name.
Comment by Karl on 4/16 @ 5:05 pm #
Hamsher had to go with “roughly 20″ because she wanted to leave her shoes on.
Of course, if you fundraise for Chris Dodd — as Hamsher and Greenwald do (the latter still undisclosed to his readers)– it is easier to get an audience with a few far Left members of Congress. Because of the reforminess.
Comment by Karl on 4/16 @ 5:10 pm #
And lest anyone forget:
And yet here she is again. I think there’s a word for that, too.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 5:20 pm #
Karl- what’s funny is that both Greenwald and Hamsher say “roughly twenty”.
Is it just too taxing to count all the way to 20? Were there portions of Congressmen there, making the addition too difficult?
I believe that Hamsher and Greenwald have now fundraised for a new advertising campaign they are putting together to target blue-dog Dems. The only campaign advice they can possibly give any Congress member is how not to be targeted by them. Certainly getting anyone elected isn’t part of the package.
Comment by RDub on 4/16 @ 5:23 pm #
Sorry about the duplicate. Feel free to delete one.
Or, y’know, both. Either way the end result is the same, really.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 5:25 pm #
And yet here she is again.
Yes, and I stand by that entire comment. The bloggers and most commenters here are beyond rational discussion, as this comments thread indicates. (Some think *I* am Glenn, which is absurd; you would then have to assume he is secretly writing for Henley unbeknownst to Henley. And also assume that my email and IP addresses cannot be accessed by the bloggers here.)
At this point, I am entertaining myself; I expect to persuade no one. I pop in for that quite infrequently. Don’t worry, I’ll be gone again for months shortly.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/16 @ 5:29 pm #
C’mon, we all know Mona couldn’t let us insult the guy who does all her thinking for her.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 5:32 pm #
I’m sorry. What was it you suppose we are to discuss?
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 5:32 pm #
Look, I can parody these people in my sleep, but for the life of me, could not make up Mona McSocky Jockstrapsniffer if you gave me a suitcase full of shrooms, a full blotter page, a bottle of Jaegermeister, and Baracky’s credit card.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/16 @ 5:36 pm #
Probably because that’s the terminology they hashed out on Townhouse II.
Comment by cranky-d on 4/16 @ 5:38 pm #
It’s difficult to remember all the talking points, but I think acknowledging that conservatives are at best entirely wrong and at worst the spawn of satan, that all good ideas in the government (which is there to take care of all good liberals) come from the left side of the aisle, and that, finally, The Gleen(s) are quite intelligent and informed and we really should fall down and thank Gaia for the pearls of wisdom he casts to the four winds.
You know, the usual.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 5:39 pm #
This is Glenn’s book we are discussing, so I think that’s completely in keeping with the subject matter.
Now run off, before I make a angst-ridden, furrowed-brow, compressed-lips youtube video of how brazen and…sorry, I just can’t carry that off like big G can. Anyway, run along and beat the stuffing out of some more strawmen, mmmkay?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 5:40 pm #
NISHI! YOU ARE SOOOOOO BUSTED!
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 5:42 pm #
You mean, the staffer of a guy who got drunk and drowned his girlfriend? How could Glenn keep from denouncing the guy right there and then?
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 5:45 pm #
slart writes: This is Glenn’s book we are discussing, so I think that’s completely in keeping with the subject matter.
Evidence only of your not having read it.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 5:48 pm #
“Evidence only of your not having read it.”
I’ve read enough of it to know that it’s written by a guy who’s striving to be the lefty equivalent of Ann Coulter, and failing badly.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 5:49 pm #
I mean, he’s not even as good at that schtick as Sean Hannity is.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 5:50 pm #
How was Goldberg’s book, Mona?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 5:51 pm #
…which is kind of like being not even as good at pro football as George Plimpton.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 5:51 pm #
You mean, the staffer of a guy who got drunk and drowned his girlfriend? How could Glenn keep from denouncing the guy right there and then?
Yes, that staffer. And I think Ted Kennedy is a piece of shit, in his personal life. But the powerful Kennedy clan made sure that incident was not properly investigated and the man was never prosecuted. It is disgusting; but it did preclude any successful presidential run.
But I do not see that Greenwald has any obligation to denounce a scandal from the 60s when the guy’s staffer in ‘06 refused to meet with him. Bottom line: Ted Kennedy is a U.S. senator, for good or ill, and hence has some power. He will never be prosecuted, and there is no point in expecting it. But he *is* a senator.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 5:53 pm #
How was Goldberg’s book, Mona?
It was atrocious and absurd. I checked it out from my library.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 5:57 pm #
At least we know they are honest enough to admit that they flat out lie, but it is okay when in service of teh narrative. Who woulda thunk that if you raise money for moonbats, you can meet with them to discuss strategy? And how does Wilson Ellers McSocky get enough time to comment here? How frustrating must it be to be Gigi’s jocksniifer/fluffer and continually be scorned for the cabana boyz with the banana hammocks?
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 5:57 pm #
Why? Did he imply that Liberals were all closet homos, or something?
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 5:59 pm #
Was it as tightly argued as Gleen(s)’ heuristic lefty-aesthetic masquerading as psychology?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 6:00 pm #
No, no one has any obligation to denounce anything. But one can avoid contact with folks one regards as execrable, unless one can gain a certain cache from such encounters.
I think that’s how it goes, anyway.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 6:00 pm #
I’ve read enough of it to know that it’s written by a guy who’s striving to be the lefty equivalent of Ann Coulter, and failing badly.
No, what you’ve read is the description of it as that, which is making the rounds among his detractors. Also, Glenn is not a “lefty,” unless that means “non-neocon.” (He has written for American Conservative and appeared at several Cato events, and is working with them on a project.)
And I would not play any role in a Coulteresque project. This book is not such. The major review source for librarians has suggested that while it is a caustic work, it is well-supported, and should be attractive for all libraries’ acquisitions departments.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 6:01 pm #
I’m wondering just how much data Glenns gathered to substantiate that John Wayne is some walking right-wing archetype.
Loads, I’m guessing.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 6:05 pm #
is, was…I’m having a John Edwards moment.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 6:06 pm #
Alright, someone needs to fess up. Is that you, alpuccino? Wilson? Socky McEllerson? Whoever it is, you are fucking killing me.
Besides, we all know that John Wayne was a gay, alcoholic coward. Just like the neotheoconz.
Comment by cranky-d on 4/16 @ 6:07 pm #
Every now and then a conservative writer gets some print-time in the NYT. Doesn’t mean it isn’t a lefty paper. Just having an article printed in a conservative publication means nothing with respect to political position. Gleen(s) can claim he isn’t a liberal, but his dearly-held positions bely the claim.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/16 @ 6:07 pm #
American Conservative is Buchanan’s joint — it’s protectionist, isolationist, and lots of other things the left’s bought into. Cato is not conservative; they’re libertarian.
Somehow, though, I have a feeling you don’t have a positive opinion of the vastly superior (and actually, you know, scholarly) work by Jonah Goldberg — Liberal Fascism.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 6:08 pm #
No, I’m not. That’s my own opinion; otherwise, I’d quote someone.
Is denial all you have, Mona?
And…isn’t American Conservative the magazine started by Pat Buchanan? Glenn’s a Pat Buchanan conservative?
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/16 @ 6:10 pm #
Funny thing is — you know what really pisses off the Left about John Wayne? That he was a strident anti-Communist.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/16 @ 6:13 pm #
It’s their stance on Israel that drug him in.
Comment by JohnAnnArbor on 4/16 @ 6:14 pm #
The major review source for librarians has suggested that while it is a caustic work, it is well-supported, and should be attractive for all libraries’ acquisitions departments.
Yeah, well the American Library Association repeatedly fails to denounce Castro for jailing librarians when given a chance at their yearly meetings. So I wouldn’t be too proud of the approval of Castro-lovers.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 6:17 pm #
slart! You have something in common with Glenn! You write, my emphasis:
He routinely makes that error (and I’ve edited it out for him several times). Neither you nor he mean “cache,” the proper term is “cachet.” I realize many think teh gays have their French down pat, but I assure you, he has the German and Portuguese mastered, but sucks at French.
Anyway, Glenn is not interested in cachet; he wants to compel the Democrats to more intensively and fearlessly push back against the neocon, authoritarian right. And Ted Kennedy is a senator, for good or bad.
Comment by cranky-d on 4/16 @ 6:20 pm #
But all his sockpuppets who comment from the same IP address he uses are interested in it. Weird, huh?
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 6:21 pm #
Gleeeens/Mona/Socky calling themselves conservative is one of my favorites. When I played teeball, there was this chubby daisy-picker and his Dad always called him Slugger. Did not make him one.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 6:22 pm #
You mean, besides being living, humanoid males with dark hair? Thank you, Grammar Nazi. By correcting my spelling, and rubbing Glenn all over me, you have completely refuted my point.
So, nothing evil about Ted Kennedy. Ok, then. Portable morals; I completely get that, in people who are seeking to self-aggrandize. Morality is an encumbrance, unless it leads to saleable outrage.
Meanwhile, still no answers to the idiotic generalizations that Glenn makes. As an editor, Mona, you completely failed in that regard.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 6:30 pm #
Gleen(s) can claim he isn’t a liberal, but his dearly-held positions bely the claim.
Actually, he refuses to adopt any ideological label. But when discussions of, say, Castro have broken out in his comments, some of his actually lefty commenters have been appalled at Glenn’s unswerving refusal to credit the dictator, given the human rights travesty in that country.
So many of you are utterly limited in what you think constitutes left or right. Glenn does have an affinity for some of the paleocons’ positions at Buchanan’s magazine, tho certainly not all. And he also has much in common with the majority at Cato.
Unless you can cite him calling for the nationalization of all or most (or even any) industry and services, and wholesale wealth redistribution, I don’t see where you get off describing him as “liberal” or “left.”
He does not embrace neoconservatism. That does not render him a lefty.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 6:31 pm #
Fail.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 6:31 pm #
Ideological labels are so much better off with a parent of each sex.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 6:33 pm #
Heh. She said sucks. At French.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 6:41 pm #
Folks, I am sitting here reading Gigi/Mona/McSocky and listening to Baracky and Hillary lie anout Wright and Tuzla. I am laughing so hard I woke up Madeline twice. I haven’t laughed this hard since the last time I watched Animal House and Fletch back-to-back.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 6:41 pm #
slart sez: Meanwhile, still no answers to the idiotic generalizations that Glenn makes. As an editor, Mona, you completely failed in that regard.
Oh. You’ve read his book?
BTW, while I do defend the manuscript, I was a micro-editor, responsible for line-by-line editing and making sure, say, the same word did not, when avoidable, show up in contiguous three grafs, and that wholly redundant sentences/grafs were excised. (None of that is always possible, for clarity’s sake.)
Anyway, I’m just amused that anyone would deny that John Wayne is a right-wing icon. The evidence that he was is as overwhelming as that Stalin killed dissidents.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 6:47 pm #
I’m just as amused that someone would assert it to be true. Sans evidence, no less.
This is even more silly than the ridiculous assertion I’ve stumbled across, from time to time, that Horatio Alger is an important part of right-wing ideology. Just because I say so, it’s true!
No surprise, given this thread, that Glenn’s book turned out to be the complete disaster that it did. Given your skillful hand in editing, I mean. I have no doubt that many of his points seemed right on, to you.
And no, I didn’t read it from cover to cover. I just read enough of it to know that it was more of the same crap that Glenn just can’t seem to stop himself from dishing.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 6:49 pm #
Send me a copy and I’ll give it a fair read & critique . . . Believe It Or Not!
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 6:49 pm #
BTW, while I do defend the manuscript, I was a micro-editor, responsible for line-by-line editing and making sure, say, the same word did not, when avoidable, show up in contiguous three grafs, and that wholly redundant sentences/grafs were excised.
Beauty!
Did Glenn and Jane meet with any non-Democrat congresspeople, Mona?
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 6:50 pm #
Refusing to adopt an idelogical position, as Gigi/Mona/Socky claims does not mean that you are not an end stage BDS moonbat.
What kind of reflected cachet does one get from Sen. Anvilhead?
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 6:53 pm #
Slarti – I denounce Gigi/Mona/Socky for rubbing the gleens all over you. Ewwwwww.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 6:54 pm #
I love the way GiGi’s so hard on Russ Feingold, don’t you? So, to recap, everyone who doesn’t agree with him is evil or stupid or both.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 4/16 @ 6:54 pm #
I’ve never run across this Mona person here before.
She comes across like a brainwashed Korean War American POW reading a war crimes confession in front of a NorK tribunal.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 6:56 pm #
Send me a copy and I’ll give it a fair read & critique . . . Believe It Or Not!
Dan, if you are serious about that, email Glenn. (I can’t get free review copies sent — and gave him my list of reviewers weeks ago — but he can.)ggreenwald@salon.com
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 6:56 pm #
The Jury has the right to disregard as credible the supportive words of ‘anyone‘ speaking for proven Sockpuppeteers,” ‘Mona’, notwithstanding the discredit brought by the very words themselves.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 6:57 pm #
Did Glenn and Jane meet with any non-Democrat congresspeople, Mona?
I do not believe so. But I’m not certain.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 6:58 pm #
GiGi’s not a liberal?
“Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
A medley of extemporanea;
And love is a thing that can never go wrong;
And I am Marie of Rumaniaâ€Â
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 6:59 pm #
Thanks, Mona. I will.
Comment by McGehee on 4/16 @ 6:59 pm #
<walks in briskly>
Hey guys, how’s — um, ewwww, what’s that smell? Did I just step in something?
Comment by N. O'Brain on 4/16 @ 7:00 pm #
“Hey guys, how’s  um, ewwww, what’s that smell? Did I just step in something?”
Monarhea, apparently.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 7:04 pm #
Baracky and HillBill are trying to outbid each other on how quickly they will surrender in Iraq, and how firmly they believe it.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 7:04 pm #
I do not believe so. But I’m not certain.
Does that tell you anything about his ideology?
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:06 pm #
what’s that smell
Why, I do believe it’s the scent of a Gleenspie
Comment by fletch on 4/16 @ 7:08 pm #
Mona-
Also, Glenn is not a “lefty,†unless that means “non-neocon.†(He has written for American Conservative and appeared at several Cato events, and is working with them on a project.)
Please name even one other “non-liberal” member of the “townhouse” e-mail group…
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 7:10 pm #
slart ahistorically writes: I’m just as amused that someone would assert [John Wayne's right-wing icon status] to be true. Sans evidence, no less.
Puh-leeze. Wayne’s Goldwater-sponsored Congressional Gold Medal, and Reagan’s eulogy.
That is a few tiny grains of sand in the mountain of evidence for Wayne’s right-wing icon status. Slart, your position is like arguing that Christians have no use for Jesus.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 7:12 pm #
Hillary vows to tax the holy hell out of the evil rich, making $250,000 or more, and Baracky says he will tax the holy hell out of everyone, and punitively tax the successful. And China is our banker again.
Mona – Short answer. All of the gleeeeens did not raise funds for any Republicans, and did not meet with any Republicans. Honesty is simple.
Comment by McGehee on 4/16 @ 7:13 pm #
Being admired by a couple of prominent Republicans equals “right-wing icon” on your planet? Fascinating. (he said politely while edging away)
Comment by Karl on 4/16 @ 7:13 pm #
Some people live in a world where Ted Kennedy killing someone in 1969 is ancient history, but John Wayne avoiding service during World War II is ripped from today’s headlines.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:14 pm #
Senators have quoted and read or entered into the record just about anything which would curry them reciprocity, Mr/s. Gleensclone – it’s just a good sales tactic.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 7:16 pm #
Please name even one other “non-liberal†member of the “townhouse†e-mail group…
I’m not on the list, so don’t have any idea who all is (and would not dream of asking Glenn to divulge that, and furthermore am interested in starting an anti-GOP, libertarian counterpart to it). But if you read Glenn’s blogroll you will see a libertarian presence there.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:19 pm #
Why, who would have ever suspected that a Sockpuppeteer would also be a tar baby?
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 7:21 pm #
nd would not dream of asking Glenn to divulge that
So he’s kind of secretive?
Comment by maggie katzen on 4/16 @ 7:22 pm #
and you call yourself an editor.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 7:24 pm #
Some people live in a world where Ted Kennedy killing someone in 1969 is ancient history, but John Wayne avoiding service during World War II is ripped from today’s headlines.
Glenn’s book is not about Chappaquiddick and Ted Kennedy’s crimes. It is about GOP icons, pols and pundits who do not live up to the narrative they peddle to the voters as an indictment of Democrats.
What happened to Mary Jo Kopechne is obscene, and I will always believe justice was not served in that case. But it has no bearing on the toxins infecting our contemporary political discussion, which is what Glenn’s book is about.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:25 pm #
I’ve already read enough of Gleens to know for sure they are not credible, starting off with their assertion and poof that Thomas Sowell is not serious, which really instead proved the same about Gleens.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 7:25 pm #
Scratch that. Baracky and Hill are going to tax the holy hell out of everyone, and if you are rich, they will go all punitive on your ass.
Mona – Before Gigi/Mona/Socky declared John Wayne to be the uber ideal of the right, I had never heard that done. I went and looked through some Reagan speeches and Russell Kirk books, and saw nothing about John Wayne.
Gibson actually asked some tough questions tonite. Good on him.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 7:25 pm #
And my blogroll would make me an Afghan?
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 7:26 pm #
Slart, your position is like arguing that Christians have no use for Jesus.
Jesus is to Christianity as John Wayne is to Republicanism.
Comment by maggie katzen on 4/16 @ 7:26 pm #
why do I think that this wouldn’t work if we replaced a few words with George Bush and President of the United States?
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 7:27 pm #
You heard it here first; Ted Kennedy is not a toxin infecting our political discussion. Despite, that is, having obscenely avoided justice.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 7:27 pm #
So he’s kind of secretive?
He’s a political activist on a political activists’ list; we work together on some things but not in that venue. If I asked him who was on that list, I imagine he would tell me. But I do not care, would not ask, and would not say even if I knew.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 7:29 pm #
So he’s not secretive. Mona is.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 7:31 pm #
That is a few tiny grains of sand in the mountain of evidence for Wayne’s right-wing icon status. Slart, your position is like arguing that Christians have no use for Jesus.
Mona mistakes admiration for John Wayne as an American icon for John Wayne, the right-wing icon.
OTOH:
Comment by guinsPen on 4/16 @ 7:31 pm #
the toxins infecting our contemporary political discussion, which is what Glenn’s book is about.
So, it’s an autobiographies?
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 7:32 pm #
why do I think that this wouldn’t work if we replaced a few words with George Bush and President of the United States?
Of COURSE it works! And is fine, depending on why you want the access, what kind of influence you wish to exert and to what ends. ***I*** would meet with George W. Bush if I thought doing so would cause him to crusade in favor of ending the “war” on drugs.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 7:32 pm #
It is about GOP icons, pols and pundits who do not live up to the narrative they peddle to the voters as an indictment of Democrats.
I’m not sure exactly what this means, but can you tell my why he focused on GOP icons?
Comment by maggie katzen on 4/16 @ 7:33 pm #
oh, okay, so ends justify means.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 7:34 pm #
That all sounds so complicated. We just take orders from Karl Rove.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:34 pm #
Face it Monas, y’all just can’t be taken seriously, neither by virtue of your words nor by virtue of your skin-tight associations.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 7:35 pm #
War on Drugs? That’s Soooooo 1987.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 7:37 pm #
You mean the one Carter gave him? Yeah, evidence of hyper-right-wingedness, that.
Thanks for pointing that out, Mona. Greenwald:
Reagan:
Clearly, an actor being eulogized by a SAG president is evidence of deep, deep right-wingitude. And that eulogy is evidence of Gleen(s) being a lying hack. I should read him why?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 7:38 pm #
Oddly, we find American conflated with conservative by Mona, as well as Barry Goldwater with right-wing chickenhawk.
Interesting points she’s making, there.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 7:40 pm #
…in much the same way that the baby hippo recently swallowed by the anaconda his interesting. It’s all a matter of having your choices end up badly.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:45 pm #
Chicken Little has always been one of my favorite Left Wing icons.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 7:46 pm #
Market manipulation! Enron! Big oil! Price gouging! Windfall profits penalty! Congressional investigations!
My ability to type the words gleenwald and. hypocrisy in the same sentence is hindered by a significant gag reflex. Frankly, it he/she/it/them/they would just admit that they are Leftists, I might be more willing to give some more thought to all of their positions. Ew. As is, we know that they cannot even engage in argument without lying, distorting, or just making shit up, so it makes it tough to take any of them seriously.
Comment by fletch on 4/16 @ 7:46 pm #
Mona-
and furthermore am interested in starting an anti-GOP, libertarian counterpart to it
If Gleen is truly a “libertarian” and/or “non-neocon”, doesn’t this exact same “ideological hook-up” already exist— as “townhouse”?
But if you read Glenn’s blogroll you will see a libertarian presence there.
You cannot be this dumb!
By that metric, “Glenn Reynolds” is a “liberal”. (After all, Instapundit’s “blogroll” includes “Alternet”, Corn, Drum, JMMarshall, Yglesias, “Crooked Timber”, DeLong, Farber, Skippy, TalkLeft, and O-Chubb (among others).
BTW, I offer my regrets that you didn’t get invited to be a member of “townhouse II”…
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 7:47 pm #
Clearly, an actor being eulogized by a SAG president is evidence of deep, deep right-wingitude. And that eulogy is evidence of Gleen(s) being a lying hack. I should read him why?
Uh-huh. Read the book to find out why Reagan’s words were horsepuckey. Other Hollywood, leading-man fathers enlisted — many older than “Duke.” He worked with his studio to get endless exemptions.
Comment by Dan Collins on 4/16 @ 7:49 pm #
You know, I kid of like Skippy, a couple of the folks at TalkLeft and a couple at Crooked Timber. I like SEK and Cernig and some others. I even kind of like Clarissa Pinkola Estes, sometimes, though I think her cover story is bunkum and she’s often ridiculously new agey.
I don’t really like Glenn, though.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 7:50 pm #
Barry Goldwater with right-wing chickenhawk
Just in case anyone didn’t know:
With the onset of World War II, Goldwater received a reserve commission in the United States Army Air Forces. He became a pilot assigned to the Ferry Command, a newly formed unit that delivered aircraft and supplies to war zones worldwide; he spent most of the war flying between the USA and India, via the Azores and North Africa or South America, Nigeria, and Central Africa. He also flew “the hump” over the Himalayas to deliver supplies to the Republic of China. Remaining in the reserves after the war, he retired with a rank of Major General. By that time, he had flown 165 different types of aircraft. Following World War II, Goldwater was a major proponent of building the United States Air Force Academy, and later served on the Academy’s Board of Visitors. The Visitor Center at the Academy is named in his honor.
One of his favorite hobbies was amateur radio and he held the call K7UGA. From his home station in Arizona he handled many “phone patches” that permitted U.S. Service personnel to be able to talk to their families back home from Military Affiliate Radio System (MARS) stations located in Vietnam.
Despite my love of history and constan reading, I’d been duped into equating “Goldwater” with “mean spirited.” That was the point of Johnson’s campaign and I fell for it even decades after the fact.. I started looking into the reality when I heard a rebroadcast of this:
“An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas, and he said that there were a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. Then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, “Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such,” and they went down there, and there was this fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in the weeks before Christmas, all day long, he would load up the plane, fly to Arizona, fly them to their homes, then fly back over to get another load.” (Ronald Reagan, if you didn’t know, the rest of the speach is well worth reading/hearing.)
I find it hard to think, Mona, that your boy isn’t engaging in a similar attempt to skew history, though I’ve little doubt that most of the first printing are doomed to moulder away on library shelves, checked out maybe twice a year.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 7:51 pm #
Mona – Do you dispute what Reagan said about Wayne, as posted by Pablo? If so, could you provide your proof. If not, you are one shitty editor.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 7:52 pm #
Other Hollywood, leading-man fathers enlisted
Do Republicans like any of them?
Do Democrats universally denounce John Wayne?
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:52 pm #
Read the book to find out why Reagan’s words were horsepuckey.
P.T. Barnum
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 7:54 pm #
Howzabout you point me to the source material instead?
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 7:54 pm #
They didn’t when Wayne sided with President Carter over the Panama Canal.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 7:55 pm #
I’m thinking this BDS business model for selling books has so far just scratched the surface.
Comment by turtle steamers on 4/16 @ 7:57 pm #
Obama won me over by using an honest, straight forward delivery to spell out his ideas and his steadfast faith in the American people.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 7:57 pm #
J., I was just thinking that if twisting history and villifying good people can win elections, why can’t is sell books?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 7:57 pm #
So…let’s see, in a Congress that was 292/143 D/R in the House, and 58/41 D/R in the Senate, we’re supposed to believe that it was the Republicans that drove through this bill to publicly adore the Duke?
Mona, you’re a pearl.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 7:58 pm #
A copy editor, JD. Not even Gleen(s) is dumb enough to have her do his fact checking…if he’d bothered to have any done.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 8:03 pm #
Hang on a second; I’ve got to go throw some more popcorn in the microwave.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 8:04 pm #
This whole John Wayne Republican ideal meme never existed prior to Gigi/Mona/Socky asserting it. Then when they start making shit up, and they get called on it, they will claim that we are defending something, which to them, constitutes proof of the original lie. Their style is circular, dishonest, and predictable.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 8:04 pm #
I’d rather read the Works of Proven Paranoid Schizophrenics – so far I’ve only read some excerpts from this upcoming best seller.
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 8:07 pm #
Right, JD, somehow reminds me of another best seller, Mission Accomplished.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 8:09 pm #
Mona – Do you dispute what Reagan said about Wayne, as posted by Pablo?
I do not dispute that Maureen O’Hara — his close friend and co-star in one of his best films, The Quiet Man — and other actors were all in favor of the medal. But his all-American icon status was then still intact.
And ask yourself, why John Wayne being proposed for a Congressional Medal of Honor, out of so many actors? That Dems went along with it means little, it was hardly a matter of major import at the time. Besides, I’m not pro-Dem, I’m anti-current GOP.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 8:11 pm #
Pablo – My bad. Mona did a good job copying. So did Wilson. And Ellers. They are going to try tracing next time.
Slarti – Hope you took a shower after she rubbed the gleens all over you.
Gleeeeens find it necessary to lie and distort to make their points. Why should we do anything but mock?
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:11 pm #
That wasn’t the question. Don’t just pretend to answer it.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 8:16 pm #
Nice try. But you did not answer a simple yes or no question. Go read Pablo at 144. Is that true or false? If true, why did gleen and you find it necessary to lie? If false, please provide proof.
What do the actions of jimmah the terrorist lover and Tip Oneill’s Congress have to do with the modern GOP?
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 8:16 pm #
“And ask yourself, why John Wayne being proposed for a Congressional Medal of Honor, out of so many actors?”
No. Congressional Gold Medal or Medal of Freedom. As you and Gleens point out he couldn’t have had the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 8:16 pm #
Oh, so now Wayne has been magically converted to a screen actor’s icon, which is just exactly like a rightwing chickenhawk icon.
Maybe someday we can make a dictionary to translate what Mona’s babbling on about into English.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 8:18 pm #
Pablo writes Reagan’s words were horsepuckey.
Howzabout you point me to the source material instead?
His citations are internal, and I’m not going to cull them. But note that not even Dean Barnett disputes the Wayne chapter, which is replete with documentation.
If you do not wish to buy it, check it out from your library; metropolitan libraries will order it; others, maybe not. (Small-town libraries tend to only order top ten in fiction and non-fiction as per the NYT.)
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:19 pm #
Or, we’ll get something like this, referenced by Karl above:
Like the pot calling the microwave black.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 8:21 pm #
Question – Is it true or false that the gleens are all habitual liars?
Answer – Yes
Mona answer – I do not dispute that Republicans are fascists.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:22 pm #
Ah, well John Wayne was not only an infantryman and a tanker and a fighter pilot, but he was also America’s first astronaut. I’d prove that to you by citing myself, but I don’t have the time.
You’re not going to get me to buy the book, Mona. I prefer to read Wilson.
Comment by guinsPen on 4/16 @ 8:22 pm #
OT: Sweep !
Comment by J. Peden on 4/16 @ 8:24 pm #
Besides, I’m not pro-Dem, I’m anti-current GOP.
Yeah, and little theocon-deranged nishi just wants to get religion out of our Government.
Comment by McGehee on 4/16 @ 8:26 pm #
Amazing that Glonawald expects anyone to take them seriously when they can make an error of that magnitude.
Comment by maggie katzen on 4/16 @ 8:26 pm #
um, assuming you mean Congressional Gold Medal, Wayne wasn’t even the first actor to be a recipient.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:27 pm #
Barnett, in his opening graf:
And his fifth graf:
See, JD? Mona can’t read for comprehension. But I’ll bet she’s a bear on punctuation.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 8:28 pm #
You’re not going to get me to buy the book,
I do not expect that you will. But you cannot reasonably criticize a chapter you have not read on the basis that you do, unless you can point to a reliable other(s) who reasonably dissect the book’s documentation shortcomings.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:28 pm #
Correction, the first quote is his 3rd graf.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 8:32 pm #
I’m sure the remainder of the book is completely free of the stupidity we’ve seen from the excerpts, Mona. If it weren’t, it’d implode out of sheer density of stupid.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 8:32 pm #
Mona – Was Wayne 34? Was he the father of 4? Did he have a shoulder injury? Did he fly to Washington to attempt to persuade them to allow him to enlist? These are simple questions. As Pablo showed above, it is possible to answer them without referencing the gleeeens book. With the underlying premise having been shown to be quite mendouceous, why would we check this book out of the library? With the fascist Patriot Act, I might get on a watch list.
Why is it that the gleeeeeens/Mona/Socky resort to reciting their resume all the time?
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:32 pm #
Fuck the book’s documentation shortcomings. We’re discussing facts here, and Gleen(s) is not the keeper of facts. Reagan went first, and you’ve called his words “horsepuckey.” Prove your thesis. prove him wrong.
Full disclosure: My uncle knew Wayne and thought him an asshole.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 8:33 pm #
…which is why we should all read it, because the rest has to be, by comparison, dazzling.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 8:37 pm #
Pablo: Barnett did NOT say the chapter on Wayne was not true or undocumented. He merely asserts neoconservatives have not claimed Wayne as an icon.
And to others above: Yes, I made a confusion of medals in one of my later comments.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:40 pm #
He also did NOT say that Gleen(s) are a master of internet sockpuppetry. That proves what, exactly?
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 8:40 pm #
Did Glenn write very much about the Republican Jimmy Stewart?
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:41 pm #
…and Gleen(s) say he is a neocon icon. Huh.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 8:42 pm #
I mean, it was Ronald Regan that gave Stewart the Presidential Medal of Freedom. That seems very icon-y.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 8:43 pm #
Go read this. It’ll help you keep the distinction in mind.
Maybe.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 8:44 pm #
Pablo – That he chooses to represent the academic, well researched, insightful tome that the gleeeeens produced, and feingold will soon read into the record, in such a deceitful manner is proof that John Wayne was a poofty alcoholic chicken hawk poofter.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:44 pm #
MayBee, Stewart had a deferment. You know what that means, don’t you?
A. He didn’t meet the physical qualifications, or
B. He was a chickenhawk, who later recovered, probably out of shame.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:47 pm #
Clearly, Barnett should have written a book refuting the book, and not just an article. Therefore, we can deduce that the book is chock full of truthy goodness.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 8:50 pm #
Stewart flew missions over Germany.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 8:51 pm #
Mona – Pablo, in citing Regan, was able to make a point completely independent of any reference to poofy gleenwaldian writings. Your response can exist outisde of gleens writings. But,making a ridiculous assertion, and using said assertion as proof of the assertion is par for the course with Gleeeen/Mona/Ellers/Wilson.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 8:51 pm #
Yes he did. But he was initially deferred…for being underweight.
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 8:52 pm #
Yes, Greenwald approvingly cites Jimmy Stewart’s war service in his book, and eventually Stewart did see combat. From wiki:
Wayne, otoh, did everything he could to get out of being drafted. Successfully.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 8:55 pm #
Yeah. I’m just wondering why Stewart’s brand of right-wing iconery didn’t make Glenn’s very important, very thorough, non-ideological book.
What could the Jimmy Stewart example teach roughly 20 Congressmen?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/16 @ 8:58 pm #
So, we’re left with Wayne is a right-wing icon because…he’s a chickenhawk, and rightwingers are chickenhawks.
Or something like that. For sure, we’re not seeing anything resembling an actual argument. Which, coming from an attorney, is just pathetic.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 9:00 pm #
Cite, please. You do that like this:
And even if you can only find citations in Gleen(s)’ book, I find it difficult to believe that you don’t have a soft copy you could C&P from, what with you being his editor. But then, it’s a big internet, and facts are not hard to find on it.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 9:01 pm #
Oh, I see Mona says Stewart is approvingly cited. His family must be so proud.
So the lesson is…different “icons” had different experiences which show that different Republicans acted differently during WWII but were rewarded by various politicians years later. Compelling.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 9:04 pm #
Mona – Wayne was married with 4 kids, had a pre-existing shoulder injury, and flew to Washington in an attempt to overturn their decision. True or false? If true, why do the gleeeeens portray it differently? If false, proof please,which should be able to be shown outside of the gleeeens scribbling.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 9:07 pm #
You (and presumably Gleens) are wrong.
There is every indication that Wayne did not persue enlistment, but he did not actively avoid it either. His initial classification (A-3) was changed to A-1 in 1944, but Republic Studios intervened and had it changed to A-2, citing, and appraently the War Department agreed, that he not be drafted for the interest of the country.
Republic had also threatened to sue Wayne if he did persue enlistment. Despite that it seems unlikely that they’d follow through, there’d be only one way to test it. Draft was the only course that woudn’t and teh studio blocked that as well.
You show me one credible indication that Wayne ever actively sought to avoid being drafted and I’ll buy two copies of the bloody book.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 9:09 pm #
IT IS TRUE AND AN UNASSAILABLE FACT THAT JOHN WAYNE WAS A FLAMBOYANT GAY CHICKENHAWK BECAUSE THE GLEEEEENS SAID SO AND EVEN IF IT IS A LIE IT IS ALRIGHT BECAUSE THE LIE HELPS ME LIE MORE ABOUT TORTURING NECON CHICKENHAWKS !!!!! TAKE THAT.
Comment by MayBee on 4/16 @ 9:12 pm #
Oh, please. As if Glenn cares. WWII was presided over by a Democratic president, so by definition it was a Democratic war. Therefore, only Democrats could be chicken hawks at the time. If John Wayne didn’t serve then he has that in common with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and Glenn Greenwald. Democratic icons, all of them.
In the annals of hypocrisy, the left (andthe non-ideologically labeled) deserve a chapter of their own for their chicken hawk/war supporter’s children should serve/pay no attention to the fact that the war supporter’s children are serving/elect a war hero/military service doesn’t matter flip-floppery.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 9:35 pm #
So, essentially, we have determined that :
1) John Wayne was a chickenhawk draft dodger and prolly gay
2) The central premise of the gleeeeens newest book is nothing other than a figment of his imagination,
3) Facts do not exist outside of the gleeeeens writings,
4) Mona is a sad and pathetic jock sniffer, and
5) Facts are subject to the gleeeens interpretation.
Comment by turtle burps on 4/16 @ 9:36 pm #
Obama seems very collected and composed. Wild mood swings, control issues, uncontrolled emotional outbursts, all point to the Hildabeast having definite bitch issues.
Comment by JD on 4/16 @ 9:44 pm #
I wonder how Mona was able to edit copy with a set of hairy dingleberries haning right there across the bridge of her nose …
Comment by Mona on 4/16 @ 10:11 pm #
I wonder how Mona was able to edit copy with a set of hairy dingleberries haning right there across the bridge of her nose …
That is quite representative of the level of discourse here, so I bow out for now. Others who want to know what Greenwald writes about Wayne and with what supporting documentation, will either buy the book, borrow it from their library if available, or read reliable reviews addressing and quoting that section.
Comment by maggie katzen on 4/16 @ 10:14 pm #
aw, nuts.
Comment by happyfeet on 4/16 @ 10:16 pm #
She sounds like an elitist I think. I get the sense that she’s looking down on us here.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 4/16 @ 10:26 pm #
I guess I’m not buying the book.
Whew. Dodged a bullet on that one. I’m sure.
Comment by Jeff G. on 4/16 @ 10:31 pm #
Mona bows out after having determined that the level of discourse here is more in keeping with the single dingleberry remark than with the bevy of direct, on-point questions she dodged on her way to avoiding our pathology by completely immersing herself in it.
Personally — and I mean this in all candor — I find Mona’s showing up here truly truly truly truly sad. Of course, it’s not like she can just lift up her shirt to get Glenn’s attention. So maybe I can be convinced to cut the officious, dissembling mega twit some slack.
Comment by maggie katzen on 4/16 @ 10:38 pm #
and I doubt he’s sharing the cabana boys either.
Comment by Pablo on 4/16 @ 10:42 pm #
Yes. First you fail, then you’re mocked. Feel free to bring a worthy argument next time you drop by to shill.
Comment by Radar on 4/16 @ 10:53 pm #
I’m glad we’re finally tackling the crucial issue of John Wayne’s actions during WWII. This has been ignored for far too long!
Comment by not Bill Bellichek on 4/16 @ 11:19 pm #
I wonder how Mona was able to edit copy with a set of hairy dingleberries haning right there across the bridge of her nose …
That is quite representative of the level of discourse here, so I bow out for now.
That is the essence of Mona, and all that is Gleenwaldian, right there. Paragraph after paragraph of ass-whuppin totally ignored so she can focus on one sentence of insult. I used to get pissed at people who would post shit like this, giving her a target for that little laser pointer of a brain she has, now I think that is all she deserves, let the word see what a trifling little pinheaded piece of fluff she is.
Comment by Lesley on 4/17 @ 12:20 am #
Yes, slack should be cut. Truly sad case.
“This infantile, way-over-the-top ad hominem-fest about Greenwald is one he rightfully ignores (and would not have time for in any event), and nothing I’d post about. But for those who think he isn’t making a difference and now attracting the attention of major media and political figures, well check out Jane Hamsher:” etc etc
Mona elevates herself to Greenwald’s celebrity status by proxy. She tells us she has edited his book, she tells us what he is thinking, she tells us what he does or does not have time for, she wallows in his proximity to Hamsher and Senators, she vicariously glories in the media attention he is receiving, she of superior insight to all things Glennwaldian. This isn’t about Glenn Greenwald, this is all about Mona.
In the oddest way, one might say Glenn Greenwald is Mona’s sock puppet.
Comment by Jeff G. on 4/17 @ 2:18 am #
Sometimes I just wish she’d post “Harumph!” and be done with it.
Comment by thor on 4/17 @ 2:41 am #
If she could lift her skirt and pick my two quarters off the bar and then “Harumph!” five dimes, she’d get my attention. Hell, I’d even let her keep the quarters.
Comment by Rusty on 4/17 @ 4:48 am #
#208
FDR. The president who, on the recomendation of a handful of people and with no other evidence, committed one third of our GDP to the making of weapons of mass destruction. FDR lied, etc.,etc.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/17 @ 5:47 am #
I can quite understand, Mona. I read a couple of excerpts from Glenn’s latest offering, and decided that it was unacceptably insulting to any person of above-average intelligence, so I declined to read further.
Done!
Unless you define “reliable” as “adulatory”, in which case: no.
Point me to a review that you approve of, written by anyone I respect, and I’d be happy to read through it. I suspect those who like Greenwald’s latest, though, are the kind of people that already believe all of that broad-brush nonsense.
Or, if you’re already gone, not.
Comment by JD on 4/17 @ 6:11 am #
My bad, everyone. I went and spoiled the fun for everyone. It appears that what I really did was give her a convenient excuse to leave after having her ass handed to her. Talk of dingleberries is way over the line. My sincere apologies to all of you racist homophobes.
Comment by JD on 4/17 @ 6:22 am #
I really enjoyed the idea that Mona refused, or was unable to answer a plethora of direct questions without referring back to the gleens drivel.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/17 @ 6:45 am #
If I’m understanding Mona’s points, it seems that we need to read Glenn’s book in its entirety, to appreciate what a thoroughly researched collection of logical fallacies it is.
I think that’s something I can leave to people who have a great deal of time to squander. For me, never is enough.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/17 @ 6:52 am #
Certainly. He was a strident anti-Communist.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 4/17 @ 7:02 am #
I liked the line about “internal citations”. In other words, gleen was using his assertions as evidence to support his own assertions.
Uh, that’s not scholarship. That’s polemic.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/17 @ 7:02 am #
To summarize:
John Wayne is a right-wing icon because a Democratically-controlled Congress awarded him the Congressional Gold Medal, and a Democratic President awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He’s a chickenhawk because he starred in a bunch of war films, but didn’t go to war, himself. He’s also a chickencowboy, a chickenrancher, and a chickenmarshall, but those aren’t important right now.
Really, I think Sean Hannity is capable of better thinking than this.
Comment by JD on 4/17 @ 7:10 am #
Sean Hannity might be able to think better than that, but the gleeeeens/Mona/Socky McSockerwilson are not.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/17 @ 7:27 am #
Here’s a couple of rave reviews:
-Publishers Weekly
“Buy Glenn’s books so George Soros doesn’t have to!”
-Ok, I just made that up. But Crooks and Liars comes close.
Precious few reviews are to be found that aren’t adulation by the left-wing blogosphere whose appetites for red meat are well-satiated on Greenwald fare. Again, I’d be delighted to read reviews of this book, provided they’re not rah-rah pieces that actively avoid the problems Greenwald has with logic.
Comment by Education Guy on 4/17 @ 7:48 am #
From someone actually interested in the truth rather than just rearranging words and concepts to convince someone my opinion has merit, I’d say this thread was very embarrassing for Mona and the Gleens.
OTOH, perhaps there is some secret strength behind the tactic of talking smack about a beloved American icon and then trying to pass him off as emblematic of the GOP.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 4/17 @ 8:41 am #
…and being just about as far along the factually incorrect axis as it’s possible to get, in the process.
Comment by Pablo on 4/17 @ 12:14 pm #
I’d just like to thank Mona once again for citing Reagan’s eulogy.
This couldn’t have happened without you!!!
Comment by Jeff G. on 4/17 @ 1:14 pm #
Greenwald was, is, and always will be a cutout. Anybody who buys his bullshit — or respects him (shame on Dean Barnett, by the way; Greenwald is on record as saying he’d lie and do whatever it takes to see his agenda enacted, which marks him as anti-democratic and so, in the strictest sense, an anti-American egoist of the worst sort) — is either brainwashed, or convinced that the rest of us are too stupid to notice the gaping holes in his logic, which, in terms of size, are matched only by his self regard. And maybe Jeff Gannons GAY PORN COCK OF LIES.
– Though that last really has no business in this thread. But, you know, what the hell.
BECAUSE OF THE HYPOCRISY!
Comment by MayBee on 4/17 @ 1:25 pm #
Jeff Gannon is a neo-con ICON, Jeff. Of course he belongs in this thread, as does his cock.
I hope the FDL contributors that spend their money on Jane and Gleen’s excellent adventures realize their hard-earned cash is going only toward those two non-ideologues’ self-aggrandizement. They are the new Jim and Tammy Fae.
Comment by Jeff G. on 4/17 @ 2:14 pm #
I’m going to be sick now.
Trackback by J Brand Mary Richards High Rise Jean on 5/4 @ 7:33 pm #
J Brand Mary Richards High Rise Jean
J Brand Mary Richards High Rise Jean- J Brand Mary Richards High Ris
Trackback by Newest Free Proxy Site on 5/5 @ 6:39 am #
Newest Free Proxy Site
Are you banned from your favorite websites? Unblock myspace, facebook, orkut using our
Trackback by 1 Fan University Of Michigan Checks on 5/5 @ 8:56 am #
1 Fan University Of Michigan Checks
When the season is on and you\’re a fan, then you need to get all that you can
Trackback by 2d3f576ac83b on 5/12 @ 11:43 pm #
2d3f576ac83b
2d3f576ac83bf43c9f82
Trackback by Meat Medley on 6/6 @ 3:32 pm #
Meat Medley…
Back to Medium Varieties Additional Pizza Baking Instructions. I…
Trackback by Deferment Classification on 6/10 @ 4:03 am #
Deferment Classification…
However, it is possible to chance the deferment clas…
Trackback by Hyperlite Drive Wakeboard 2007 on 6/14 @ 11:49 pm #
Hyperlite Drive Wakeboard 2007…
0…
Trackback by Hyperlite Drive Wakeboard Drive Boots 2007 on 6/15 @ 7:50 pm #
Hyperlite Drive Wakeboard Drive Boots 2007…
0…
Trackback by J Brand Mary Richards High Rise Jean on 7/13 @ 10:02 am #
J Brand Mary Richards High Rise Jean…
We\’ve put together a few of their fashionable items from…
Trackback by spela roulette wheel on 7/20 @ 12:18 pm #
spela roulette wheel…
marketing blots creamed snouts an,…
Trackback by lowest on line continentalgeneral com charleston wv spectra5 on 1/22 @ 5:11 pm #
lowest on line continentalgeneral com charleston wv spectra5…
Zorn enticed.disconnected:would …
Comment by directory on 6/14 @ 2:16 am #
Lovely to see such a wonderful site. Thank you
Comment by guide on 7/25 @ 3:08 am #
Thank you for providing this site and guest book.