Heh
.
I’d like to challenge Ezra  not to a debate in which there could be no winner  but to a Charity Boxing Match. That’s right  man-against-man (though Ezra usually prefers to pick fights with women) in a ring with gloves. You can even wear headgear if your mother insists.
Hell, I don’t think they should have to put up all the scratch. I think it should be pay per view. Oh, wait. He’s already suggested it.
Great quote from the comments:
You over-compensating gay conservatives slay me…
Left by PeterO on October 13th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Such a putdown to be called a faggot.
Also, Oliver Willis is to blogging as Hungry, Hungry Hippo is to chess.
From Barcepundit, the actual poster from draftgore.com:
In space, nobody can hear you pontificate. Thank God.
The subsequent post has a Che Guevaraed version up.
Donald Douglas’s Burkean Reflections has become American Power. Good stuff.
On Memeorandum today I read a snippet of a John Cole post stating that his transformation to lefty blogger must be complete, because he agreed entirely with Krugs on SCHIP. But I could have told him it was complete when he was cited approvingly by Gleen.
Broad Worried by Putin’s Powers
It’s an all-Ann Coulter edition of American Thinker. Yawn.
“I’d like to challenge Ezra  not to a debate in which there could be no winner  but to a Charity Boxing Match. That’s right  man-against-man (though Ezra usually prefers to pick fights with women) in a ring with gloves. You can even wear headgear if your mother insists.”
Do all right wing bloggers look and act the stereotype? That would be so disappointing.
Yeah, andy. If you ever see someone who looks like that . . . right wing blogger for sure.
The irony is that the guy accuses Ezra of having challenged Malkin to debate as a means of boosting his hits. So he posts this, and look at his sitemeter rocket. Meanwhile, all the earnest lefties miss the irony. As usual.
Ezra looks very clean and happy.
Yes. Happy little hygiene queen.
“Yeah, andy. If you ever see someone who looks like that . . . right wing blogger for sure.”
You have it backwards.
“The irony is that the guy accuses Ezra of having challenged Malkin to debate as a means of boosting his hits. So he posts this, and look at his sitemeter rocket. Meanwhile, all the earnest lefties miss the irony. As usual.”
That’s “the irony”? That a lefty blogger would propose a policy debate to boost hits, and right winger would propose boxing? Are people here Alanis fans too?
I like Alanis.
It was a pretend question, andy. I didn’t see the point in answering it seriously.
The irony is that they played right into dumb ol’ redneck biker Robbie Cooper’s gambit to raise hits. Go take a look.
“The irony is that they played right into dumb ol’ redneck biker Robbie Cooper’s gambit to raise hits. Go take a look.”
Thats the irony: right wingers get hits by acting crazy and threatening fights. It’s the opposite of what you would expect.
Wow. Could that imagery be any more totalitarian? It’s in the same artistic tradition as this and this.
Poor form!
After all, if you are going to pick a fight with a “progressive”, you might try to choose one that isn’t so “girl-ish”.
I would suggest challenging someone a bit more “manly”– like ‘Majikthise’ or the ‘Mahablob’…
Alanis would kick Ezra’s ass, actually. She works out.
That Gore poster is templated right from of the Chairman Mao “Sun King” posters from the 1960s. I’m expecting to see one soon with an illuminated Gore-head beaming down on a trio of hippies in an open pot-field.
Which proves once again that the far left is just as religious as Dobson, they just worship human beings (and by extension,themselves) instead of divinities.
happyfeet: “I like Alanis”
Bill Murray: “People like blood sausage, too. People are morons.”
the Pope Gore poster looks like a sci-fi pulp cover … AGW and Scientology … hmmmm… anyone ever look to see if Al is really L Ron Hubbards secret bastard son?
Why do you hang out with us stereotypes, andy? Are you doing a dissertation or something?
Incidentally, wasn’t John Cole just a few weeks ago trotting out Matt Sanchez’ sexuality as a way to discredit his having interviewed one of the information officers associated with Beauchamp?
Man. “Smear” sure doesn’t mean what it used to.
To borrow in spirit from The Incredibles, when everyone is a protected class, no one is.
Alanis is insightful. You can tell cause she hardly ever rhymes.
#14 Darleen
the Pope Gore poster looks like a sci-fi pulp cover … AGW and Scientology … hmmmm…
Or maybe Soviet-era propaganda. Put a bushy moustache on Al and he’d be Uncle Joe.
That’s a pic of Ezra? Good golly, when did he start wearing big boy underpants … a week ago?
Oh hey! I just noticed I got a hat-tip for that at No Pasaran.
Cool!
I am not afraid of you and I will beat your ass.
Hey, it’s the title of a CD. No need to get up all in my face over a Yo La Tengo disc.
That Gore thing should be a movie poster:Al Gore is…
XENU!!!
…I see that the <center> tag is deprecated in PW’s comments.
Very well…
The lefties need to take to heart an ageless bit of wisdom: “Lighten up, Francis!”
And, andy, if you’re so disgusted by us, you don’t have to stick around. Unless pissing in the pool is your job. In that case, we’ll all swear you’ve been doing it and you can go do something constructive, like catch up on “Dexter”.
Interesting to see that Gore stuck with the Earth-tones.
Another possible source for the Gore poster.
Coming Distractions…
From No Pasaran by way of Dan Collins at PW:
He's coming to save the universe!
…
Ok so being gay is good or bad now ? Libs keep changing their minds. Otherwise, why use “gay” as an insult ? I just don’t get it.
Matt – It just depends on who the target of the name calling is. If you are calling a Leftist a
faggotyou are a homophobe. If you are directimg that slur at a wingnut, no problem. Ditto for the utterer. If a wingnut uses the word, always homophobic. If a leftist does it, it is all about the context.Doris Lessing kicks ass.
And Harold Bloom whines.
The Lessing essay left me wanting more.
Can someone photochop Michelanelo’s Adam reaching out to touch Algore’s extended index finger in order to complete the image for me?
Thanks.
It’s up to you happyfeet. Or don’t you have a library in your hood?
John Cole post stating that his transformation to lefty blogger must be complete, because he agreed entirely with Krugs on SCHIP.
Cole dropped PW from his blogroll today. That’s what you noticed.
Alec, you were trying to be funny. It didn’t work. If on the off chance you were pulling a ‘Jonah,’ good luck with that.
Nothing like having the idiot trolls drop by on the weekend. michelle – don’t you have some young minds to destroy, or some Soros money to spend?
Just looking at those two pictures makes me laugh.
Do all right wing bloggers look and act the stereotype? That would be so disappointing.
Hmmm… I don’t know. I guess I do look a bit like Robbie Cooper.
Michelle, you were trying to be obtuse. It worked. Now for a real challenge, try being rational.
We’ll wait.
Michelle – You sound semi-coherent. Are you on the wagon?
nachosbellegrande (mishelle) is one of the most incoherent trolls around.
Libraries give me anxiety.
Usually cool ranch doritos is off stalking sparkle. She must be especially lonely tonight.
It is really hard to stay awake for these baseball games that last until 1 in the morning.
Ezra sure is pretty. Michelle, not so much.
I do not envy this cleveland pitcher – Ortiz, Man Ram, and Lowell in the bottom of the 10th.
JD leading off the bottom of the 11th must be an omen.
Oh good grief. Is my stalker bothering you guys?
Sorry about that. I guess Jeff needs to post her vitals again. She needs the attention.
Asdrubal Cabrera is the 1st person named Asdrubal to ever play in the playoffs.
I hope the BoSox did not trade/pay too much for Gagne.
Ah… Jill at feministe has a little crush on Ezra
The most knowledgeable … isn’t Jill just so precious?
[…] Dan’s Pound Ezra post… Posted by Serr8d @ 6:13 am | Trackback Share […]
I’d like to see bad ass harley dude take on manicured Ezra priss any day! I’ll donate my newly “Thor” embroidered thong for the cause!
i just read through the links…..but what a bunch of pussies the left have become
UM — I thought that the left was supposed to be the toughies of the sixties, the revolutionaries, tough, banded strong.
Ezra Crew are a bunch of scardie cat pussies?
anyhow, go bad ass harley dudes! I would like nothing more than than manicured Ezra’s pissing off the Harley dudes – they are strong,big and drive in packs and super don’t like manicures.
Go Dawg!
Message to feministe
–He’s not only one of the most knowledgeable people I know when it comes to health care policy, —
No he’ not, he’s a manicured pussy.
Cole dropped PW from his blogroll today. That’s what you noticed.
Since I don’t do stupid, I didn’t know PW was listed on Stupid juice, but doesn’t this seem cause for celebration?
A protein wisdom regulars all pop campaign at the same time like News Years Eve countdown? Or something?
I see a big promotion and a live blog in the future…like next week, but soon!
It would be really great if Ace celebrated too!
I know what you’re getting at, but the idiots of the sixties left were actually a bunch of pussies who killed innocent people and unborn children. I hope the bitch mentioned in my link dies in prison, by the way. And, no, I don’t care about her activity in “community issues,” either.
That poster can not be real. It can not be serious. I can not believe my eyes. Let me express my disbelief.
The left are coffee house revolutionaries with Walter Mittey size delusions of “persecution” and “oppression” by The Man, all the while remaining unarrested and un-renditioned while they rail about the “police state”. The Marine Corps has done more to uphold universal principles of human rights than any of them.
The Harley dudde challenging that metrosexual to a boxing match reminds me of the Oakland chapter of the Hells Angels led by Sonny Barger taking on a Commie led “antiwar” protest in the 60s.
That poster is remarkable. Is that a brownshirt, or is it earth tones?
I see they knocked about 50 pound off of Al for their socialist hyper-realist propaganda, too. Three chins just doesn’t square with the Long March – too many stops to catch your breath.
The prospect of Cooper beating Klein’s ass aside, why won’t Malkin debate Klein? Because this:
“Debate†Ezra Klein? What a perverse distraction and a laughable waste of time that would be. And that’s what they really want, isn’t it? To distract and waste time so they can foist their agenda on the country unimpeded.
…is pretty fuckin’ lame.
If the two sides aired their positions in a debate, some actual good might out of all this. I’ll give Jeff G. credit, he wouldn’t have ducked a la Malkin.
Hubris
If someone actually lied about you, consistently, why should you believe or trust that person would act in good faith vis a vis a “debate”?
How many times do you trust an embezzler with doing your books?
“Pull my finger!”
-Al Gore
“If the two sides aired their positions in a debate, some actual good might out of all this.”
Like in a public forum? Like on a blog? Malkin’s position is pretty clear. Klein not so much.
Tsk9
What is really giggle inducing about Jill’s swooning about Ezra is, from what I can find, that he is all of either 23 or 24, wet behind the ears UCLA graducate in poly-sci (oooooo! ahhhhh!) and hasn’t held any job but Writer of Opinion.
This seems to fall right in with the Left’s penchant to grant “wisdom” status to children who prettily mouth their tenets.
Well, this…
I will debate Michelle Malkin anytime, anywhere, in any forum (save HotAir TV, which she controls), on the particulars of S-CHIP. We can set the debate at a think tank, on BloggingHeads, over IM.
…seems pretty flexible and Malkin gets to choose. That’s unclear?
– “If that’s an example of Klein “picking a fight with a woman,†then what about that woman picking a fight with a child who just got out of a coma?
–DO IT
FROM BEHIND THE CHILDRENFOR THE CHILDREN !!!11!1!!1!!one!!!“…seems pretty flexible and Malkin gets to choose. That’s unclear?”
It is clear he is grandstanding. I consider the blogosphere a pretty good forum for debate, Ezra’s preening is as goofy as the biker dude “calling him out”, which I think was the point.
Darleen,
Klein offered the parameters to be “[w]e’ll talk S-CHIP and nothing but — nothing of the Frosts, or Congress, or her blog.” So any personal history between the two would be a non-factor.
B Moe, if anything, this SCHIP deal has proved the blogosphere is often anything but a good forum for debate.
“Ah… Jill at feministe has a little crush on Ezra”
Its rather obvious that, despite protestations to the contrary, the Jill is quite frugal with the nookie, and would only let a hairless, slight, effeminate “man” with vestigial genitals near the holy vagina. (I think it is because his hands are soft and supple, like her hands are.)
My favorite is the dissonance between “women are just like men and just as willing to use men for sex and discard them and only bang hot men and use their bodied OMG” and “I’d never bang a Rethuglican (i.e. they can’t get the sex from my holy, free range, progressive vagina.”
Like, as if Jill ever really would frequently use and discard men strictly for carnal pleasure, Tom Brady wouldn’t be high on the list. “He’s hot, but supports the FAIR tax, so I’ll pass.”
Personally, and I believe that I speak for all men here (adjusting for religious and moral compunction, of course): a woman’s politics really never weigh into the calculus of “should I bang her?” A nice, plump but firm and shapely rear end? Yes, indeed. In favor of Hillarycare? Not so much.
“The Marine Corps has done more to uphold universal principles of human rights than any of them.”
I’ll second this, devildog.
And note that your birthday is under a month away.
“Klein offered the parameters to be “[w]e’ll talk S-CHIP and nothing but  nothing of the Frosts, or Congress, or her blog.†So any personal history between the two would be a non-factor.”
Nothing of the Frosts? Declare the central point of the initial argument to be out of bounds? That is your notion of good faith?
“B Moe, if anything, this SCHIP deal has proved the blogosphere is often anything but a good forum for debate.”
How so? I think the opponents have made a pretty good case, the fact the proponents have nothing but OMG MALKIN HAIT TEH KID!!111!!!!! in response only proves they suck at real debate.
“Nothing of the Frosts? Declare the central point of the initial argument to be out of bounds? That is your notion of good faith?”
I’m for the debate, but I agree that the absolute lack of effective means testing (i.e. the Frosts) is sort of our gripe with the expansion of the program.
I take it that Klien would find 45 different ways to say “life is difficult” and “you hate the chilluns.”
Declare the central point of the initial argument to be out of bounds?
The central underlying point is the policy.
Democrats use anecdotal example which demonstrates nothing about he policy. (OMG DON’T HURT KIDS)
Republicans attack the anecdote, which shows nothing about the policy. (OMG FROSTS HAVE SUV)
What about SCHIP?
“Republicans attack the anecdote, which shows nothing about the policy.”
Bullshit. The argument is that the Frosts are in fact a perfect example of the SCHIP being more about subsidizing irresponsible behavior among adults than protecting children.
Like your challenge, Collins. But I disagree that a debate would provide no winners. Couple years back Tom Maguire was talking behind Greenwald’s
back and I suggested he have a live debate with his secret nemesis. Maguire punked out, of course, leaving Greenwald victorious by default.
I understand your challenge was metaphorical, but sense you would love to see the match ringside to catch the bloodspray on your bologna sandwich.
Hubris
Nothing about the Frosts? Are you f’ing kidding me?
The Frosts are the central to the whole argument over nationalized healthcare, which the Dems demand for expansion of SCHIP is the first step. Ezra wants to remove them from the debate for one reason only, even he cannot defend the cynical pimping of Graeme. Moreover, the Frosts -while ‘qualified’ at this time to receive SCHIP – clearly demonstrate that maybe programs like SCHIP should be revisited in that Mommy and Daddy Frost make irresponsible decisions and it is their neighbors (ie responsible taxpayers) who end up footing the bill.
And Ezra refuses to go there?
Yep. Bad faith.
It’s just pitiful, really. The whole idea that we need a debate among a couple screechy bloggers because it’s just clear an honest debate is not something the media can produce. And the left says that healthcare is broken in our society.
That’s the wrong diagnosis.
“Comment by Semanticleo on 10/14 @ 9:05 am #
Like your challenge, Collins. But I disagree that a debate would provide no winners. Couple years back Tom Maguire was talking behind Greenwald’s
back and I suggested he have a live debate with his secret nemesis. Maguire punked out, of course, leaving Greenwald victorious by default.”
For the life of me, I’d love to know how a creature with the word “semantic” in his username manages to subsist without understanding English.
…leaving Greenwald victorious by default…
Got to give him his due, Greenwald is the absolute best at winning imaginary debates with invisible opponents.
I keep looking at that smile . . . and Ezra has that Barry Manilow “masculinity” that the dames find so irresistable.
BMoe and Darleen,
For the love of all that is holy, Malkin could still make the argument vis-a-vis the allegation that SCHIP does/would cover people it shouldn’t. You would really rather see a debate, say, about the Frost’s particular tax returns or about who blogged what over the past week? Talk about bullshit.
Miss Cleo – I would pay to see you and Gleeenwald in the octagon.
I agree that good could, and would, come from and honest debate of the particulars. However, a debate between Sweet Little Ezra and All Evil All the Time Malkin is not the forum that this good will come from.
“Comment by JD on 10/14 @ 9:43 am #
Miss Cleo – I would pay to see you and Gleeenwald in the octagon.”
That’d be a steal purse match, would it not?
“For the love of all that is holy, Malkin could still make the argument vis-a-vis the allegation that SCHIP does/would cover people it shouldn’t.”
She has already made it, Hubris. Repeatedly. As have many people here and other places. What we are waiting on is a substantive fucking response from the other side, rather than challenges to a debate that is already being attempted. You are like the preening schoolyard bully daring someone to come to the bathroom with him. If Klein wants to debate Malkin then do it. Make a damn cogent point.
Malkin could still make the argument vis-a-vis the allegation that SCHIP does/would cover people it shouldn’t
Ok, let me get this right. She could make the argument without using any specific example
and be snorted at as pulling the “Welfare Queen” ‘urban myth’
because that’s what I’ve already encountered whenever I have argued against nationalized medicine.
Here we have a known quantity … the Frosts … who volunteered to make public their story of “neediness”. They made themselves public figures. Ezra cannot argue the Frosts are “an exception” or “urban myth” because Harry Reids’ staffers hand picked them as a shining example of just the kind of people SCHIP helps and should be expanded to help even more!
I tend to agree with Hubris that they could leave the Frosts out. but then what’s to debate? it would be like this:
Malkin: I don’t think children in families making up to $83,000 a year and “kids” up to age 25 need help from the government.
Klein: I think they do.
it’s like we’ve gone round and round and round on for the past week. Where does personal responsibility end and “nanny statism” begin?
– Debate. What debate? Now that the Lefts cover of weasling behind a child in their latest attempt to force Socialized medicine on the public, coupled with the fact that the “Not destitute” irresponsible Frosts will get another slurp at the public dole, they can all go back to their blunts and bongs now. The good news is since the Left has no real power it amounts to just the usual bloviating screech from emotional children posing as adults that seems to be a part of the current political landscape.
– On another note it appears the computers all crashed before the mediots at the NYT, and the gaggle of the usual Lefturd MSM suspects, got around to the “rest of the Sanchez story”. One of the Lefts favorite meme’s, “Cherry picking”, seems to be very homegrown.
What would be fun is to propose extending coverage for everyone but fat kids and kids whose parents smoke.
but then, i also haven’t had my first cup of coffee yet this morning. But yeah, Klein is free to make his argument any time now….
– Feets, you left out fat kids with fat parents that smoke.
– Oh. And transexual midget ho’s that play the tuba.
Enough with the MIDGETS !
the mental ones especially
I have accepted mental midgets as simply a part of life. The likes of KKKleo, timmah, andy, steve, actus, frameone, et al. are simpled something to be suffered, and are but a small burden in comparison to the rest of the good people one encounters in this little corner of the internet, where almost 8.25 million people have visited.
Fat faggot children with parents that smoke and transsexuals regardless of stautre get right in. Head of the line.
Because of the DISCRIMINATION!
Miss KKKleo and Gleenwald in the octagon would be epic. She would start to brown-nose the Gleens. He would counter with a hissy fit about how he is gay, and cannot allow a woman to touch him in that manner. Then, the cabana boys, seeing Miss KKKleo with her nose in Gleeen ass would leap the fence, and would do some Cabana Jiu Jitsu all over his ass for cheating on them.
That must be a picture of algore in college, because he is carrying around at least half of a Rosie O’Lard inside him now.
Hubris:
I hereby challenge Al Gore to debate me, anytime, anywhere, in any forum, on the particulars of anthropogenic global warming. We can set the debate at a think tank, on BloggingHeads, over IM.
Now, by your “reasoning”, if Gore doesn’t accept, he loses. Right?
Right?
What’s that you say? Gore is a busy media figure, and I’m just some guy writing on a blog?
Oh.
Of course the root of the problem is the definitions of words, as usual.
For conservatives, the word “help” denotes a situation in which the receiver is an active participant in the process. This does not always mean that the person being helped makes a significant contribution to the final result, but it does mean that the person being helped makes whatever contribution he or she is able to make.
A person sitting on his or her ass, occasionally piping up to bitch that the work isn’t being done fast/well/elegantly enough, is not receiving “help” as the concept is understood by conservatives. Since this is apparently the default meaning of the word as self-described “liberals” use it, the two sides have a hard time agreeing on what “help” is appropriate in any given situation.
Regards,
Ric
Ric – That is but one example, but beautifully describes some of the fundamental differences, and thus, obstacles between the Left and Right when it comes to trying to have any kind of meaningful debate.
The Al Gore debate is a good point. Any porgressives that haven’t supported a debate between a conservative and Al Gore on anthropogenic global warming are just hypocrites with no credibility here.
Iraq will never learn to deal with its problems if we continue to help them.
I challenge algore to a debate on the importance of earth-toned clothing.
I challenge semanticleo to a debate on the horrors of PRE traumatic stress disorder.
I challenge John Edwards to a debate on whether or not channeling voices of the dead is ethical.
I challenge Gleen Gleenwald to a debate on the merits of Brazilian cabana boys.
I challenge Andrew Sullivan to a debate on the rhetorical differences between shrill and completely unhinged.
True enough, happyfeet, so long as we accept the “liberal” definition. Under the conservative rubric, the Iraqis do what they can and Americans pick up the slack, in the hope that the amount the Iraqis can do increases over time and therefore the amount of slack Americans have to haul in becomes less.
Another definitional problem is “debate”. Newbie or wannabee writers often submit their work for “critique”, meaning that another person reads the work and analyzes it, exposing deficiencies and suggesting remedies. Some people are offended by critique; the only response they can accept is, as I believe Patricia Wrede described it, “five pages of closely reasoned praise.” In a similar vein, when a conservative uses the word “debate” he or she means that contradiction is expected and must be dealt with by reason. “Liberals” apparently mean “listen to our TRVTH and offer supporting data”, with any contradiction constituting “hate” or “prejudice”. Makes it a trifle difficult to support the so-called adversarial method.
Regards,
Ric
– The debate could also address why nanny statism is bad in general, and bad with respect to health care in particular. As for myself, I don’t buy the usual government inefficiency/half-assedness arguments because private health insurers are some of the most error-prone, bureaucracy-laden organizations I’ve come across. On the other hand, I’m concerned about increased government health care leading to additional impositions on private behavior/habits for prevention purposes. I also have problems with the way the Democratic SCHIP plan appears to try an end-around with respect to PAYGO requirements. Also, what are the different alternatives and why are they better?
– The Gore analogy would be a good one if it weren’t off by several orders of magnitude, Gore not knowing who the heck you are. Malkin obviously knows who Klein is; she took the time to do a lengthy post on him. If Gore give a speech about how he can’t lower himself to debating you, you will have an excellent point. As it is, I would say if he refuses (or has refused) an offer of a debate from some sort of reputable global warming skeptic, than he does his side of the debate a serious disservice, as does Malkin here.
Lomborg-Gore.
“five pages of closely reasoned praiseâ€Â>/i>
From aldo’s link in the pub we learn that this is what is called “raising consciousness.”
– Recently, everyone had the chance to see the unequivical creedo of the collective commune when Hampsher published her Neo-Marx manifesto for the Left on FDL, berating the uppity Edwards wife for daring to find any fault whatsoever “with our own”. Actually remarkably candid of her in finally admitting, in writing no less, the complete inability of the Left to handle or tolorate adverse debate. Can’t imagine how people with that sort of mind set could hope to deal with the vageries of the real world out there.
Sunday Funnies – intentional or not…
This is a poster, for real, not photoshoped from the “draftgore” pipples. Hmmmm… Flash Gordon meets Uncle Joe (or Hugo Chavez). And they say cheesy sci-fi cover art isn’t being done anymore. [snort, giggle, guffaw] Over at the NYTimes where……
Lomborg-Gore.
Sure.
BTW – The BoSox waaaaay overpaid for Gagne. I fell asleep after Cleveland scored their 4th run in the 11th.
There is a lot of dull football right now.
The only good thing about the Pats and Cowgirls will be that one of the has to lose.
Malkin obviously knows who Klein is; she took the time to do a lengthy post on him.
Nice spin, but it won’t fly.
I know who Jeffrey Dahmer is. I might even write a post about him.
Doesn’t mean I’m obligated to debate him on the merits of cannibalism.
Try harder, eh?
Signed, the guy who utterly destroyed Al Gore’s global warming theory through winning a debate by default.
You really seem to have trouble coming up with analogies that are… analogous. Try harder.
Signed, the guy who never said that a rejection of a debate is tantamount to losing the debate, but that probably won’t matter to you anyway
– The Left has never met a debate they couldn’t find some way to avoid. Most usually by moving the entire ballpark.
You really seem to have trouble coming up with analogies that are… analogous. Try harder.
Translation: you have no response.
Thanks for playing, though.
The response is:
(1) Pundit writing about another pundit is not analogous to someone writing about Dahmer. (2) Gore not debating you is not at all like Malkin not responding to another blogger’s debate challenge when she takes the time to write a lengthy post about she will not debate him.
(3) Unfortunately, neither version of SCHIP will combat retardation, so however things play out, I’m facing online conversations like the one I’m having with you for decades to come.
Ric:
You don’t know ‘help’ until you’ve been bitched out for not helping enough.
Example: I’m in the USCG Aux and we were monitoring a regata on the Detroit River. The sailboats coame to the finish line and furled their sails, started their engines, and went into the yacht club. One turned towards buoy, a buoy that marked a sand bar. They got stuck. We called in to the station and, as ordered, stood by to observe. We were chewed out for not getting them off.
Okay, we can’t do that. No one was hurt and they weren’t in danger (they couldn’t sink – they were already on the bottom), if they needed a non-emergency tow they could contact a marine salvage company or get a friend. As it turns out, they put everyone in the back and gunned the engine in reverse and got off the sand bar (really – how fast does a sailboat move under auxiliary power?).
But there we were, watching – with the red and amber oscillating light and the Coast Guard Auxilliary Patrol signboards – so we were supposed to do everything. Instead of doing it themselves (what the devil did they think that channel marking buoy was for – decoration?) call for the government to help.
As they motored into the yacht club, we knew they would soon be in the bar, cursing us for not getting them out of a minor incident that they got into and which they were fully capable of getting out of.
For the location, see the Detroit River chart, and the lighted buoy south of Sugar Island, just east-southeast of Grosse Isle.
P.S. The Coast Guard is not a free maritime AAA. If you need a tow, call a commercial tow company – unless there is true danger, not an inconvenience. Then call us.
happyfeet at #102:
See my comment, supra. There are problems and then there are problems. The true issue is discriminating between the two. Stuck on a sandbar on a warm, sunny, summer day = inconvenience. Broken down in open water with a thunderstorm coming on = problem. Out of gas = inconvenience. Out of gas in the main shipping channel with a 700′ ore freighter a mile and a half away and bearing down = problem.
Clarification to #117: we were chewed out by the hapless (clueless) sailors and their friends, not the Coast Guard.
Mikey, that was opposed to be ironic to illustrate the liberal schizophrenia with respect to their ideas about helpfulness. Liberals pick and choose the brown people they think are help-worthy by pure political calculation is what #102 says even though it says nothing like that at all.
I am a very good person.
“I am a very good person.”
I know that – forgive me for using your comment to further illustrate my comment. The difference between ‘problem’ and ‘Problem!’ is quite vast, yet so many do not see it. A dent in a fender and a shotgun slug through your back window are both car damage, yet…
It’s like the difference between spending trillions on a theory about a maybe harmful couple degree rise in temperature and actually working to benefit actual people.
You think raised consciousness grows on trees, hf?
I like being able to see a result from what I do also. Must be why I take less pride in a brief that won at the Michigan Court of Appeals and more pride in the wooden office chair I repaired. The one only provides guidance on how cetain utility costs are to be booked, while the other returns a chair to functional use.
The Vikings’ A. Peterson is good. Damn good.
The Frosts needed lower case h-elp, prior to the accident. The State provided capital H-elp after the accident, due to the Frost parents utter and complete irresponsibility.
“Comment by Dan Collins on 10/14 @ 1:16 pm #
You think raised consciousness grows on trees, hf?”
No, on 7-leaved shrub.
The limbs of the tree of consciousness sag dangerously neath the weight of the gathering frost.
– At any rate, the Left has lost this latest bullshit ploy at Socialised Med. They don’t have the votes in Congress to overturn Bush’ veto. Little Graeme, their “shilled child moral authority who’s family shall not be questioned” is actually covered. So much for that tin-hat, tin-pot ploy. Next.
It isn’t going to stop. The more that it’s revealed for what it is . . . you want class-war? You got class war, morons.
Prolly can, with a decent graft on suitable rootstock.
Downside is, it doesn’t reseed true.
– Yeh Dan…..Thats all our country needs lumped on top of the costs of fighting the WOT. More social give-aways.
– If the Left thinks 2000 and 2004 were tough elections, they’re going to think 2008 is armaggedon. I think Conservatives have watched the rise of the Neo-Marxist gaggle for the last 8 years, and we’re prepared to work harder than ever to keep that shit out of government. All the fake PEW exit polls in the world isn’t going to help them this time around.
Pundit writing about another pundit is not analogous to someone writing about Dahmer
This guy is some random yahoo who I’ve never heard of before. Though I’m not a particular fan of Malkin, I know that she appears on network television on a regular basis.
Implying that all “pundits” are equal is intellectually dishonest.
Thus far the argument has proceeded like this:
You: Malkin should debate this guy.
Me: Malkin has no obligation to debate every random yahoo in the blogosphere.
You (moving the goalposts): Malkin has heard of this guy, and gave him some attention, therefore she should debate him.
Me: Acknowledging someone else’s existence incurs no obligation to debate that person.
You (apparently unable to figure out a way to move the goalposts yet again): “RETARD!”
Hint: that means I win.
Sorry about that.
You: Malkin should debate this guy.
Me: Malkin has no obligation to debate every random yahoo in the blogosphere.
That’s actually where the goalposts disappeared. They were replaced by a strawman holding up his arms in a “Y” position. I never claimed Malkin had an obligation to debate every random yahoo in the blogosphere.
Implying that all “pundits†are equal is intellectually dishonest.
Never did that either. However, Klein is beyond “random yahoo” in that he is relatively well-known in the blogosphere, your never having heard of him notwithstanding. There is a land in between “random yahoo” and “equal to Malkin’s fame in every way.” I call that land Sanity.
Try it this way, it might help (and it involves Dan’s suggestion, even though I find Lomborg to be suspiciously clean, young, and hairless:
1. MALKIN : KLEIN
A. GORE : DAHMER
B. GORE : ANONYMOUS BLOG COMMENTER
C. GORE : LOMBORG
D. GORE : BEAVER
According to Big Tent Dem at Talkleft (www.talkleft.com), Graeme Frost is going to be on Olbermann on Monday.
Hubris
While Klein has enough blog creds to propose a debate, Malkin’s response wasn’t just about Ezra, but a sourcing of why it is incredible to believe Erza is making the proposal in good faith.
I don’t care what a legend the young, inexperienced Ezra is in his own mind, but he has never retracted his lies about Malkin and repeats them to this day.
Malkin made a pointed reference to Geraldo… a male who said he’d “spit on her” if he ever saw her (among other vicious things). He is a “peer” but do you believe if he offered to have a “debate” with her she’d be obligated to agree? Why should we believe Ezra is any more sincere than Geraldo?
Sorry, at TalkLeft it’s Last Night in Little Rock’s story.
Still though. Graeme Frost on Olbermann.
MayBee
Wha…?
Could someone call CPS on the Frosts or something.
MayBee
Found this quote from Mommy Frost on yahoo
I guess we can add “lying” to “irresponsible”, eh?
Darleen,
To me it’s not a matter of obligation per se so much as “why not”? Malkin said the other side wouldn’t offer a good-faith argument, Klein offered a good-faith debate (and offered that references to her blog, etc. would be off limits). If he breaks that promise it’s there for the world to see. If he lacks sufficient experience or knowledge it would be there for the world to see. A search of his site shows that whether one agrees or disagrees with him, he seems to write numerous sober, policy-driven articles about health care, so I think it would be an interesting debate.
Darleen, let’s just add “Holy feces! We never saw any of this coming!”
Of course, having your child deliver a rebuttal to the President of the United States and receiving critical attention for that is no more foreseeable than not having enough insurance to cover your children in the event of an accident and then having an accident, so I really can’t fault them here. I mean, really! Who could have seen that happening?
(rolls eyes)
I think it would be an interesting debate.
Undoubtedly. However, you didn’t answer my question on whether or nor you believe Ezra would be anymore sincere towards Malkin than Geraldo. And do you also believe Malkin unreasonable if she does view Ezra on par with him?
“After giving a few interviews, Halsey and Bonnie Frost now say they don’t want to say anything
I guess we can add “lying†to “irresponsibleâ€Â, eh?”
They, as in Halsey and Bonnie, aren’t going to say anything more, Darleen. They are going to go back to hiding behind little Graeme and letting him defend them. I think along with lying we might add disgusting and reprehensible. If their children were pets, those two would be facing charges. The world really is upside down.
However, you didn’t answer my question on whether or nor you believe Ezra would be anymore sincere towards Malkin than Geraldo.
Yes, I believe that his offer is sincere.
And do you also believe Malkin unreasonable if she does view Ezra on par with him?
Unreasonable? I dunno. Wrong? Yes.
I think the criticism belongs squarely with the Democrats who pulled this stupid political stunt in the first place. I’m sure Li’l Frost read what was handed to him.
[…] MayBee) Posted by Darleen @ 6:00 pm | Trackback Share […]
Once again, the world is rotating counter-clockwise. If these parents, who profess to wish to remove themselves from this “debate” think that an effective way to remove themselves from the debate is to send their 12 year old out to one of the most vile hacks on TV, then they have clearly inhaled way too often.
But it would be cynical to say that Mr. Signed My Name to It didn’t write the email to Tumulty.
Once again, the world is rotating counter-clockwise.
[pedant]The world has always rotated counter-clockwise.[/pedant]
Depends which pole you look at it from.
Relaxing the rules that much, Dan, a clock can turn counter-clockwise, depending on which side you look at it from.
My wife actually used to have a clock that turned counter-clockwise. It was in a place where the most convenient way to see it, or any clock, was by looking in a mirror — so it was the ideal clock for the purpose.
I don’t know, slart. The thumb rule is fine if there is a top, but for most clocks the difference between front and back is less a matter of convention.
I tend to look at it this way: right-handed rotations are counter-clockwise. Hold your right hand in front of you, stick your thumb right at your eye, and curl your fingers into a loose fist. The direction your fingers are pointing indicates a right-hand rotation, by convention, and so a right-hand rotation, being counter to the way a normal clock rotates when viewed directly, is by definition counter-clockwise. The Earth performs a right-hand rotation about true North, so it rotates counter-clockwise.
Yeah, some (all, possibly) of this is drinking your own bathwater. North is North because it’s the axis of positive rotation. The axis of positive rotation is defined by the direction of right-handed rotation. As I said, pedant.
IOW, it’s all a matter of convention.
What does “if there’s a top” mean, here?
JFTR, though, I’m an engineer, and so stuff that’s likely boring for normal mortals fascinates me, but I’m an alchemist compared to a real physicist.