One of them looked familiar. I just can’t place my finger on it.
NOTE: I’d go after Mystery Blogger(s), too, but I said what I have to say at the moment in previous posts and at the comments to this approving citation of GG at Reason.
Here was a discussion of one of my posts regarding Marcotte at Crooked Timber. In the comments you’ll see that I’m taken to task for criticizing GG.
Microsoft Vista: Not all that?
Iowahawk shows us the way to salvation.
OMG ANOTHER NON NON GLENN GREENWALD (FAG) POST!!!1!! HE’S NOT EVEN WORTH TALKING ABOUT WHICH IS WHY EVERY THIRD PW POST IS ABOUT HIM! GLENN (SOCKPUPPET FAG) DOES THE MOST DISHONEST THING POSSIBLE – ACTUALLY QUOTE FROM BLOGS POOR GLENN REYNOLDS!!!!! HIM AND HIS ARMY OF BUSH HATING GLENNITES (FAGS) WILL NEVER HAVE THE INTEGRITY OF MICHELLE MALKIN AND HER CONCENTRATION CAMPS ARE COOL BOOK! [INSERT FAG REFERENCE], SOCKPUPPET, SOCKPUPPET !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Greenwald is gay? Who knew.
I imagine that you don’t see the hypocrisy of his statements regarding use of sources, amok. That’s all right.
Do you find it at all that this conceited windbag is constantly demanding that others cop to dishonesty, but can’t bring himself to come clean about his sockpuppeting. He feels, as well, that he can lecture others about their use of sources, whereas his own actions are exempt.
He beclowned himself, and now you have, too.
By the way, I’m thinking it’s about time to cancel my subscription to Reason.
Which is too bad, because I love some of the writers and contributors. But c’mon: Greenwald, in an archived bit pointed out by daleyrocks yesterday, admits to his agenda, which is anything but laudable.
That Reason keeps taking on as heroes of the month whoever seems edgy and topical (generally on the left) is enough to make me believe that they’ve lost a bit of their integrity under Nick’s reign.
A shame, too. There are so many classical liberals to which much of the libertarian worldview appeals. But they are being pushed away by a new brand of libertarian—one who is so fed up with the excesses of the social conservative right and an idealistic foreign policy that it is actively embracing people like Greenwald, who has admitted to his desire to poison the free market of ideas with whatever subterfuge it takes to bring down the plague of Bushco.
I never knew Machiavelli (at least, the persona he adopsts in the Prince) was a libertarian.
I suppose you saw that stuff over at Crooked Timber, Jeff? They were willing to throw Marcotte (and McEwan) overboard, if necessary, but Gleen was untouchable.
Bill,
I hate to break it to you like this, but I don’t read anything typed in all caps. Especially if it is in bold font.
I apologize in advance if you had anything cogent to say, but my experience is that the screamers never do.
Well, Jeff, they are “fed up”. That excuses anything, no?
Greenwald in the past used pseudonymous personas in discussing himself, therefore I will not believe his contrast of lieberman’s words. He has also said that he has as a goal doing this sort of thing. Therefore I will not believe his doing of this sort of thing.
But Reason? I have to give Reason some leeway. As libertarians, they are incapable of seeing a marketplace as poisoned: it is supposed to take care of itself. Market failure? never.
I feel mostly the same as both Dan and Jeff, but honestly, it isnt reason that is f’ed up nearly as much as it’s just Dave Weigel. He does the majority of the posts at H&R and they just are ridiculous lately.
Don’t dump the the whole pub just because one of its main contributors is a jackass.
Didn’t see it Dan. Link it in the comments here if you can.
Right now I can’t even navigate around my laptop. I’ve tried to wait things out, but I don’t think I’m going to be able to. Looks like I’m not only going to have to cave and buy a new laptop, but I won’t even be able to buy the Mac, because I don’t want to pay for the last run of a moribund OS release and the fix they are rumored to be working on for the screen (which cools the machine off better and makes the battery run longer and the screen look brighter).
This sucks.
Isn’t there someone around with an extra box who’d be willing to loan it to you till you can get what you’d like?
whitd–
I’m not saying that GG can’t speak truth. Perhaps Lieberman should admit that he was wrong. The problem is:
1) GG demands that others cop to poor judgment when he himself won’t come clean about his absurd Magic Boyfriend.
2) GG claims that Lieberman’s statements are symbolic of everything that’s wrong with the country.
3) GG seems to believe that having once (accidentally?) misled people, someone else has given up his authority forever.
4) Unless they’re GG.
Jeff -OT, I know, but what’s the deal with the Mac OS? I’m on the verge of buying a new iMac. Should I wait a bit?
Leopard is coming “this spring.” I wouldn’t wait on it if you are buying an iMac. For me, it’s just that it will arrive at around the same time as the next iteration of the Mac Pro, so I was hoping to wait.
Might have to break down and pick up another HP.
Sucks.
John Emerson has, in that thread, impressed me as a very smart guy who can’t be bothered to bring any fraction of his intellect to bear on this subject.
I’ve got little use for either Greenwald or Malkin. Or Coulter. Or that Orcinus fellow. It’s all simultatneous name-calling/selfbackpatting dressed up in varying degrees of drag.
I mean, dress it up as you will, but underneath all the makeup and falsies, it’s still a guy.
Bill Donohue
chirp
Slart —
But how do you feel about Hilzoy and Mona?
Tell me, and I’ll admit that I find Gary Farber extraordinarily creepy.
I think Mona and hilzoy are entirely different people, with entirely different characteristics.
I tend to respect hilzoy rather a lot, and Mona rather a lot less, particularly when she’s leaping to the defense of GG. hilzoy tends to be more about persuasion, while Mona tends to be more about how awful those other fellows are. hilzoy tends to be very specific in her criticisms; Mona not at all. This is not to say that I agree with everything hilzoy says, but I do think she’s in general more highly regardable than…pretty much everyone on the left side of the blogosphere. Her occasional comments about you are puzzling, though.
So, other than that they both are female, I don’t see much in common between the two, other than neither of them seems to like you much.
I’m not sure why I said all that, because you’ve already confessed all about Gary.
Anyway, I think that broadly mocking people you see as ideologically opposed to you doesn’t tend to persuade, which is why I think it’s more useful to offer specific criticisms of Senator Leahy, for instance, rather than a lambasting of that large, corrupt gang of leftards.
Oh, and I tend to think of you as being specifically critical rather than broad-brush critical, Jeff. I’d thought that would be obvious, but on rereading my last comment, it occurred to me that you might take it differently than I had intended.
I was only asking rhetorically, Slart.
Although now that you mention it, I don’t find Hilzoy has been quite so intellectually honest in her dealings with me.
Though I tend to bring that out in people. Part of my charm.
Re: Farber. He actually brought a notebook to a blogger bash and then later “reported” on the event. Plus, I believe he was wearing shorts.
I don’t think I was the only one who was uncomfortable—but hell, I played to it. I figured if he was gonna paint a picture based on a single meeting, I would give him big bold strokes to use.
I think that one is only an anemic cricket.
Really, Slartibartfast, that Niehart/firedoglake post was pitiful.
But I guess it worked well in “Group”.
Yes, Gary’s a strange bird. Probably suffering from a multitude of physical and emotional dysfunctions has something to do with that, or vice versa. I’m pretty sure that his reporting and note-taking was supposed to be humorous, but not completely sure.
Ok, I take it back. I am completely sure.
It is too bad that snark is not a good tool for solving complex geopolitical problems.
If it was Reason blog and Dave Wiegel in particular would have already taken care of most of the worlds problems.
I very much doubt it, but I’ve been wrong before.
Perpetually, in fact, if you happen to believe many on the left side of the blogosphere (and a few on the right).
There are quite a few I’ve taken for mere assholes who, when they got on a Goldstein-hate-jag, exposed themselves as insane, evil assholes. It’s an awesome power you’ve got, unique here on the tubes, to bring out the crazy. (But this is a crazy asshole who likes you talking, so–shovel of salt on that.)
Incredibly dumb shit re: you aside, Hilzoy posted the single most disturbing thing I’ve ever seen on the internet, a post at OW built from a series of message-board quotations about knockin’ up hos, with voices all conspicuous in their black maleness (conspicuously not noted), interspersed with exclamations of typical progressive horror at the idea of Those People breeding.
This was all masked in boilerplate patriarchy blah-blah, of course, but it was a clear, and truly disturbing–even, or especially, to me, who imputes such motives too freely (though often ironically)–case of Fear of the Black Penis.
I’ve always found Slarti’s and Sebastian’s commentary interesting, but I stopped reading the site soon after that post, because no one called her out, and the comments were all similarly masked reprises of the horror chorus. Racism is only funny when it’s not real. She’s deeply fucked up.
(And even that is more generous than all the dirty clairvoyant-diagnostic shit she said about Jeff, so all’s fair, right? Right?)
I let my Reason subscription lapse years ago, and miss it not a whit. The “work” of Julian Sanchez and Brian Doherty drove me out, and this Wiegel doesn’t seem to be any better.
I do sneak back to the website on occasion to catch up on Ronald Bailey’s work, which I still enjoy immensely.
Yeah, and Cathy Young, Jacob Sullum, Charles Paul Freund, KM Ward, Jeff Taylor—there are plenty of reasons (ahem) to keep reading, but I find that they are, editorially, at least, coming dangerously close to going off the libertarian rails, and that the crash will leave them on the left side of the tracks.
In the end, I’ll probably keep my subscription going—I like to support libertarian thought (for all my NAZI TENDENCIES)—but this embrace of Greenwald, who Patterico annihilated yesterday (just now seeing this), doesn’t bode well for them.
Well, anyone familiar with Gary’s writing on other topics would immediately recognize this as a foray into comedy. Whether it’s actually funny is another subject, but he’s definitely got his tongue in cheek.
All that said, I don’t know quite what to say about Gary, other than he’s more like a Gary Farber than anyone else I’ve ever met.
Not that we’ve met, although I have offered to buy him lunch while I was there on vacation.
Hmmm…BoZ, you were referring to this post?
So, not just a momentary lapse of Reason, eh?
Sorry, I can never resist the really obvious jokes.
Oh, and the last link in this post is kerflooie. You can’t spell “http” without “h”.
Thanks, slart.
I know what Farber wrote was meant to be humorous. I just don’t think his taking notes was meant to be humorous.
He was studying us like certain naturalists study pygmy hogs.
You can’t spell “http†without “hâ€Â.
He’s always doing that.
He was studying us like certain naturalists study pygmy hogs.
I see. And how does this make you feel? scribble…scribble…scribble