From the Corner:
Apparently what Chris Mathews said earlier: “…I’m sitting here holding in my hands a disgusting document, put out not for attribution. But it come from the Democrats, they are circulating it, I can say that. It’s a complaint sheet against judge Alito’s nomination. The first thing they nail about this Italian-American is he failed to win a mob conviction in 1988. they nail him on not putting Italian mobsters in jail. Why would they bring this up this ethnically-charged issue?”
BECAUSE OF THE IDENTITY POLITICS!
****
update: Not enough for Dan Rather, certainly, but enough for most of the rest of us…
****
update 2: Full text here (via Redstate)
****
update 3: First, read the hysterical, belligerent rant aimed at egghumping wignuts (Merlot muscles, is my guess), then stick around for the comments, where it dawns on the conspiracy nuts that Howard Dean is actually taking credit for what they’ve spent the day attributing to GOP dirty pull.
Man. Comedy gold!
(h/t LGF)
And finally, here’s Dean on Matthews, trying to justify it.
He’s actually roasting the Democrats for attacking a Republican?
Did someone make Chris an offer he couldn’t refuse?
He’s setting us up for the revelation that the document is a GOP plant.
When in fact it will be a Dem plants disguised as a GOP plant disguised as a Dem doc.
THIS IS ALL ROOOOOOOOOOVE’S DOING!
BECAUSE OF THE ROVIAN PLANT MACHINE!!!!!!
I question the sliming.
Wasn’t this one of the Kossacks’ double-secret dirty-trick scenarios?
WOP WOP WOP WOP
TOP WOP STOPS COPS; MOB-MOP A FLOP! Film at eleven!!
Because of the cheesey headlines! (sorry, ran out of my all-caps allotment for the month)
Gotta love this: Italian-Americans somewhat asserting and adamantly not countenancing identity politics.
T/W military, as in I heart our military
Well, there goes $300 out of my paycheck to replace the monitor I just snorted Pepsi all over. That headline is awesome.
Stupid, $300 headline.
Even now, a panicked Steve Gilliard is frantically photoshopping Alito’s face onto a can of Chef Boy-Ar-Dee.
I want to know more about the document and who gave it to Matthews. Whoever’s responsible needs to pay.
Everyone knows that Itallians aren’t REAL minorities.
Just like my lovely Asian spouse who isn’t a REAL minority when it comes to educational and poverty statistics.
BTW, the kos talking points are addressed pretty well here. From someone who’s not exactly a staunch conservative themselves.
Lott was talking about a Dem talking points memo on the radio today, though nothing about the slur part. The one he referenced came from Reid’s office.
Accept this Justice as gift on my daughter’s wedding day.
Coincidentally, today is the first day I noticed the “Boondocks” BlogAd on the left side of the page.
I think if you were to look at the fax number on the document, you would see it came from a Kinko’s somewhere in West Texas…
Of course it will be attributed to aides and not the congressperson of choice. I do look forward to the looniness and lack of cogent rebuttal points to this nomination, however. For that I thank you Mr. President.
What’s this about pasghetti?
I… I’m outraged!
No… no… wait, that was just gas. CARRY ON!
Also: I DEMAND WAFFLES.
Kossacks are funny funny people!
While complaining about this newest Rovian slime, one of them brings up the “RNC”-ian slime calling them Merlot Dems. Without realizing, apparently, that Howard Dean created the concept of Merlot Dems.
Perhaps Howard Dean can show he embraces Italian Americans by coining a new phrase, Chianti Democrats.
Its not personal Dems its business.
Brunello Democrats?
They talk Merlot, but they live Night Train.
I don’t think they pack Merlot while trolling for votes.
Redstate has some interesting info. on this memo.
http://www.redstate.org/story/2005/10/31/194827/79
Does anyone else read:
…I’
(that is, an a with a circumflex acccent, a euro sign, two vertical lines one on top of the other, an I, another a-circumflex, another euro sign, and a superscripted TM)
in place of “I’m”?
Is is my browser or what?
“Repeat after me: Forward text or PDF only. Got that? Now write it, 1000 times. WRITE, DAMN YOU!”
And: Waffles, Sortelli? How…interesting. Next you’ll be requesting some MERLOT, eh – Monsieur?
SB: pay
Somethings got to be pretty disgusting to be too much for a flacid hack like Matthews.
Because they can’t imagine behaving any differently themselves and it’s just shocking when anyone else does it?
Don’t be dragging my french heritage into this, mojo, or I will be forced to pre-emptively surrender myself to a jail system that grossly violates my human rights and quite possibly I will die of neglect during a particularly warm summer.
Christ, Jeff, you just make me seriously laugh out loud with that one.
It’s flaccid, pal.
And putrid.
No no no. Non. Waffles are Belgian, Monsieur. We of la belle France prefer cake – please get your stereotypes straight. And everyone knows the best complement to our wonderful Bordeaux wines is a good bratwurst mit kraut.
Silly American.
Oh, crap. Halliburton and the mob are working together. I just knew it.
All right, someone had to do it:
“I’m not drinking fucking Merlot!”
“The first thing they nail about this Italian-American is he failed to win a mob conviction in 1988. they nail him on not putting Italian mobsters in jail.”
The sheet mentions no-ones ethnicity.
Addendum to Update 3: More unbelieveably funny stuff from “Hunter” over at KOS. After his insane rant turned against him, he was forced to gnaw off his own leg to escape and is now blaming Chris Matthews of MSNBC (!) for the bleeding stump. For the record, though, he’s still vowing to take out Matt Drudge via hand-to-hand combat.
Hunter, here’s the real truth about Republicans: The movie Terminator? It wasn’t an action flick, it was a documentary accidentally released by replicant #7261149. We’re coming to get you, Hunter.
<snort>
–
Rove:
Leave the memo;
take the cannollis.
–
Anyone know how to wipe spittle from the inside of a monitor?
I’m thinking about challenging him to a celebrity deathmatch, because he’s a fucking stupid hysterical lapsed Catholic who thinks he can speak for the rest of us fucking stupid hysterical lapsed Catholics. Stupid fucking moron, BRING IT ON!
The above was completely unserious, by the way. Except for the celebrity deathmatch thing.
Actually, with that ethnic mix Hunter’s “demeanor” is to get drunk, beat the shit out of his wife and then maybe shoot his enemies in the back with a lupara if he still has the energy, but hey, why read a history book now, big guy?
The highlight of that Kos article was when one of the posters started talking about the OP’s typically “calm and reasoned opinions” and when he starts using capital letters, they can really feel the “power” behind the anger.
Show me a moonbat who has a calm and reasoned opinion and I’ll show you somebody who’s never once voted democrat.
Tried reading it but there’s only so much slogging a person can be expected to do for a gag. Kos’s comments section always makes me feel bad. Not a coherent, informed or rational thought among them. Like madmen screaming in their cells.
What a waste. Whatever do they use for brains? How did they get that way? And, what’s more, how can we nuke whatever it is from outer space and destroy it forever?
So I ran this comments section against Kos’ comments section through an online readability tester and discovered this:
1. Percentage of word with three or more syllables:
Kos: 10.90%
PW: 8.44%
2. Gunning Fog Index (The lower the number, the more understandable)
Kos: 8.17
PW: 4.33
3. Flesch Reading Ease (The higher the score, the easier it is to understand)
Kos: 78.38
PW: 93.42
4. Flesch-Kincaid Grade (how many years of schooling it would take someone to understand the content.)
Kos: 4.69
PW: 0.82
Granted, this test is rough. And the number of comments may cause a sampling error (~350 vs. 40).
I draw two conclusions from these data:
1. The Kos Kidz use bigger words–but they don’t know what they mean. (Or, possibly, the abnormally frequent use of words like, ‘motherfucker’, ‘capitalist’ and ‘chimpymchitlerburton’ skew the results.)
2. The clarity of PW’s thought is such that no education is necessary to comprehend it. It’s axiomatic.
I have just one question.
What in the hell is an ‘egghumper’? I’ve heard of ‘Jesus humpers’ but that’s pretty self-explanatory. An ‘egghumper’ is–what–in the pocket of the egg industry? Are we referencing the Simpsons? What?
The original document doesn’t mention ethnicity at all. This must be one of those times when it doesn’t matter what was actually said, or what the intent of the speaker was, as long as some hearers can stretch and strain to hear what their predetermined ideological positions demand that they hear.
But LIBERALS ARE RACISTS! HATERS!
Total bastardizing of intentionalist arguments, Josh. The document led with Alito’s mob case defeat. As archconservative Billmon points out:
(h/t Blogometer).
An intentionalist could look at the fact that the 18 year old mob case acted as the lede in this document and draw a conclusion that what one was supposed to draw from that was a pointed suggestion of ethinic syncronicity. Or he might conclude it was simply accidental and unfortunate, though the evidence for that is more flimsy, considering that of all the things about Alito the document could have led with, it chose the mob case. These interpretative guessed don’t have to be the correct—the intentionalist could be wrong, and for what it’s worth, I never made the claim that bashing Alito’s ethnicity was the primary reason the document was organized as it was, preferring instead to allow Chris Matthews to climb out on that limb—but your argument simply misunderstands intentionalism.
Well, it sure is refreshing to see the left notice that Chris Matthews is a fucking hysterical freakbaby jerkoff now, isn’t it?
So, who wants to be the second Democrat to challenge him to a duel?
An intentionalist could note that, perhaps, the document first dealt with the one talking point that deals Alito’s record before he got on the bench before proceeding to his judicial record.
Your argument seems about as persuasive as that floated during the Bennett Lynching to the effect that “well, maybe he didn’t advocate aborting black babies, per se, but he must be a racist because it was the first thing that came to mind.”
I believe Billmon’s objection stems from his suspicion that including the item would be interpreted exactly as it has been here. Nothing in the quoted excerpt goes against that interpretation.
I don’t misunderstand intentionalism, I just think the evidence for bad intent is here so flimsy that no plausible intentionalist case can be made.
Of course s/he could. So?
Listen, your entitled to interpret the memo’s intent however you want to, Josh. But Chris Matthews disagrees with you. Me, I’m not interested enough in getting into the minds of the three authors who worked on it to argue the case one way or the other, except to say that I find it suspect that they opened with a loss on a mafia case from many years ago when he’s up for the Supreme Court and not some state attorney general job.