« Why the Immigration Bill Failed | Main | I participated in my first podcast »

Joe Klein is shocked at the vitriol that spews from the left side of the blogosphere

Joe was on the receiving end of some of that vitriol and was so shocked by it he felt the need to warn everyone about it.

But the smart stuff is being drowned out by a fierce, bullying, often witless tone of intolerance that has overtaken the left-wing sector of the blogosphere. Anyone who doesn't move in lockstep with the most extreme voices is savaged and ridiculed--especially people like me who often agree with the liberal position but sometimes disagree and are therefore considered traitorously unreliable. Some of this is understandable: the left-liberals in the blogosphere are merely aping the odious, disdainful--and politically successful--tone that right-wing radio talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh pioneered. They are also justifiably furious at a Bush White House that has specialized in big lies and smear tactics.

It's Rush Limbaugh's and George Bush's fault? You can't be serious, Joe. You're trying to get back on the leftist bloggers' good side, aren't you.

Charles Johnson at LGF adds: "You and your magazine helped build this constituency, Joe. Own it. Be proud of it."

Update: Rick Moran notes that Joe is already feeling the heat from the nutroots for his criticism:

Klein is already hearing it today for daring to call the liberal blogs what they are; raving lunatics who cannot tolerate an iota of dissent from their worldview. Will Joe Klein do as most other liberals do who find themselves in the crosshairs of lefty blogs and go before them with bended knee and abjectly apologize for his heresy? Or is he enough of an independent thinker to tell them to take a hike?

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Joe Klein is shocked at the vitriol that spews from the left side of the blogosphere:

» Joust The Facts linked with Quote Of The ... 23rd Hour

Comments (69)

More and more democrats (th... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

More and more democrats (the list is endless) are desparaging the vitriol and asking "Can't everyone just get along?"

Isn't that sort of capitulation and 'peaceful, touchy-feely' sentiment one of the things Wingnut Nation despises about the Left? They aren't tough enough on foreign leaders, they cave and flip-flop.

In other words, when those of Kim's ideology quote
Klein and similar representatives eschewing the poisoned atmosphere of politics, it's their way of saying; "We wish you would make it easier for us to remain in unchecked power"

Not a freaking chance. It has been war since 2000. May the best men/women win.

thanks....we will.... (Below threshold)
ke_future:

thanks....we will.

As opposed to the Vitriol s... (Below threshold)
Ryan:

As opposed to the Vitriol spewing from the right at the moment?

Semanticleo:"W... (Below threshold)
marc:

Semanticleo:

"Wingnut Nation"...?

Excuse me but I think Joe Klein was speaking to you.

"We wish you would make it easier for us to remain in unchecked power"

Oh really? Then please explain oh great political sage, just how the delusional vitriol and hate spewed by both sides checks "unchecked power."

Not a freaking chance. It has been war since 2000. May the best men/women win.

And who fired the first shots? Could it be Gore when he asked for a Fla. recount but only targeted 3 counties that were firmly in the Democrats hands.

Shortly after that the "stolen election" meme was born.

Ah, the stolen election - a... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Ah, the stolen election - a wonderous time where, by dint of massive recounts and legions of lawyers discarding absentee ballots by the bushel (so much for the 'every vote must count' meme, eh?) the only way Gore could count it as a win was by ignoring the unimpeachably valid absentee ballots. And even then, he'd have won by less than two hundred votes. With the totally valid ballots added in, he lost by about 500 votes.

Ah, to have had President Gore in the White House on 9/11. I'm sure his response would have been perfect and impeccable, and everything flowing since then would have been without any error whatsoever.


It was a razor-edged squeaker - but he did lose.

J.

Gore would have put the ter... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Gore would have put the terrorists responsible for 9/11 in a "lock-box." What a jerk. ww

Joe Klein might have a bett... (Below threshold)
jim:

Joe Klein might have a better time avoiding "vitriol" if he posted articles that were factually accurate and logically consistent.

I know, I know; but it's still possible.

aping the odious, dis... (Below threshold)

aping the odious, disdainful--and politically successful--tone that right-wing radio talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh pioneered.

Setting aside for the moment that he sounds like another liberal who just got mugged, Klein conveniently avoids talk radio's reasons for success: it appeals to a broad base that, before its beginning, was largely ignored by the left wing media.
To characterize talk radio as politically successful ignores its most telling accomplishment; it is amazingly profitable, and that's a concept Klein should not ignore but does.

The follow on success of conservative blogs in an open and competitive market, similar to radio, has got to be really irritating to the left. Complaining about the lockstep mentality of the hard left and then serving up a hugely successful right wing radio personality as your foil is absurd, even more so given the abject failure of left wing talk radio.

Jim:Joe Klein ... (Below threshold)
marc:

Jim:

Joe Klein might have a better time avoiding "vitriol" if he posted articles that were factually accurate and logically consistent.

Assuming that's true how does that excuse being awarded the "Wanker of the Day" by Atrios for nothing more than printing a FACT?

Why does it excuse how Klein was "hammered by bloggers and Swampland commenters for "stalking" Harman into an apology, for not checking her vote in the Congressional Record, for being a "water boy for the right wing" and many other riffs unfit to print" when he DID print a FACT?

Come-on Jim surely you can describe a reasonable explanation right?

When you print something WRONG you get what's deserved, in a civil manner, But he printed FACTS and got blasted anyway.

Speaking of the 2000 electi... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Speaking of the 2000 election, remember how we constantly heard how Gore won the popular vote by 500,000, and how that meant he really won, and how HUGE a margin that was, blah blah blah?

Then Bush wins by more than 3,000,000 in 2004 in popular vote and........silence. Suddenly the popular vote count meant, uh, er, uh, well, nothing.

Bwahahahahahaha.....dems crack me up.

"It has been war since 2000... (Below threshold)
xray:

"It has been war since 2000."

LOL, what war since 2000? If we had war here, your fat liberal butt will be d-e-a-d. You don't know what war is; it sure isn't your spitballs.

Semanticleo is just a miser... (Below threshold)
BillyBob:

Semanticleo is just a miserable loser who want to share his/her/its misery. To be fair, everyone should be as miserable.

Too bad loser, life goes on and as xray says, if this was war, you would have died long ago with your ass in the air.

Speaking of the 2000 ... (Below threshold)

Speaking of the 2000 election...

The Gore 2000 Election Truthers will never concede your point Jo because it is the centerpiece of their Conspiracy Fantasy.

Bill Whittle at Eject!Eject! recently wrote an excellent piece on the mindset of these folks.

You drooling, slobbering tr... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

You drooling, slobbering trollops lecturing on the perils of war........(chuckle)

It makes my heart glad I have such unworthy opponents. Were it you were more of a challenge.

Pity.

Semanticleo spews bile inst... (Below threshold)
kim:

Semanticleo spews bile instead of his usual wit because he's sore about the Libby thing. Hey, S, twelve law professors sounds like a jury of Walton's and Fitz's peers.
===================================

If you're really interested... (Below threshold)
jim:

If you're really interested in what actaully happened, as opposed to Joe Klein's self-serving version that allows him to complain about meanie liberals who point out he's awful, go here.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/p_lukasiak/2007/jun/07/joe_kleins_big_lie

"The Iraq vote was taken in the House at 6:45 PM, and in the Senate at 8:26 PM on May 24. Joe posted his claim about Harmon's vote - and Clinton and Obama's change of position at 9:37 AM the next day. Within two hours, the Swampland commenters were pointing out that Joe had gotten Harman's vote wrong. By 11:13, Booman Tribune had noted that Klein had gotten it wrong, and at 12:53 Atrios cited Klein as "wanker of the day", linking to Boorman. Sometime after 4PM, Joe gets a call from a Harman staffer, telling him that Harman had voted against the bill, and Klein posts that at 5:13PM. Later that night, Harman leaves a voicemail apologizing to Klein, which he posts at 12:54 the next day.

"In other words....there was more than 15 hours between the time Harman changed her mind, and Joe said she'd voted for the bill.

"And while Joe's commenters (who he cites later for their viciousness) tried repeatedly to get Joe to correct his post beginning less than two hours after he posted it, he ignored them. Only when he got the staffer's call did he correct the record, and then it took him an extra hour to do so. Harman's call didn't come until well after the staffers call.

"But Joe was not initially attacked for getting the vote wrong, but for stating as fact that "[v]oting against it means you're in favor of a precipitous departure from Iraq", for supporting his argument by quoting Harman's justification that "[t]o vote against this bill was to vote against giving them the equipment, the armor they need", for falsely stating that "a majority of Democrats who are not running for President" voted for the bill (123 Dems"not running" in the House and Senate voted for the bill, 147 against), and for falsely claiming that Clinton and Obama had "changed their position" when they didn't take a position on the bill until the last minute. (Klein's fictitious "fact" that voting against the bill meant voting for immediate withdrawal, lead to that false accusation, because each of them had said they were against "immediate withdrawal'.)"

That's what I'm talking about.

This is exactly the sort of terrible reporting, false accusations and refusal to admit mistakes that is the real cause for the "vitriol" Klein complains of.

For a list of many of Joe Klein's whoppers that's given liberals a hair trigger, go here:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/05/klein-entirely-consistent/

Kim;I will ask you... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

Kim;

I will ask you the same question as I asked Dersh.

If the SP is unconstitutional, who is there to
rein in an AG gone off reservation? Any thoughts?

A direct response would be appreciated instead
of the usual dog-and-pony show.

Ask JokeLine which blogger ... (Below threshold)
jp2:

Ask JokeLine which blogger was arrested on charges of terrorism. (We here all know it was a freeper)

Uncouth/uncivil.

SemanticleoYo... (Below threshold)

Semanticleo
You drooling, slobbering trollops lecturing on the perils of war........(chuckle)

What did I miss? Who are you talking to?

x-ray and BillyBobRoyTomSuz... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

x-ray and BillyBobRoyTomSuzy since they mentioned war and you did not.

who is there to... (Below threshold)

who is there to
rein in an AG gone off reservation? Any thoughts?

Hell if I know Einstein. Ask Web Hubbell or Janet Reno.

Why Bush, of course. But S... (Below threshold)
kim:

Why Bush, of course. But Schumer, through Comey, McCarthy, McNulty, and Mueller at the CIA has controlled the Department of Justice, unconstitutionally, I might add, until Bush and Gonzales caught on to McNulty's knife in the back in February, his perjury, as sworn to by Goodling.

Sorry, this administration, after six years has finally exerted executive control over the DOJ.
====================================

x-ray and BillyBobRoy... (Below threshold)

x-ray and BillyBobRoyTomSuzy since they mentioned war and you did not.

Oh...them. They're mean, aren't they? But when you talk them this:

Not a freaking chance. It has been war since 2000. May the best men/women win.

....you tend to get a strightforward response:

"Hell if I know Einstein. A... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

"Hell if I know Einstein. Ask Web Hubbell or Janet Reno."

Or Ken Starr?

"Why Bush, of course"... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

"Why Bush, of course"

You still goin' home with the one who brung 'ya?

What control over the DOJ? Rehearsing Gonzaliarz
on the art of prevarication?

KimAs mentioned abov... (Below threshold)

Kim
As mentioned above, I'm trying to ketchup while finishing my "transfat will destroy mankind fries":

I'm not following this link:"Comey, McCarthy, McNulty, and Mueller at the CIA has controlled the Department of Justice"
If you've explained it before just link. Not trying to create more work. Would like the backstory.

Semanticleo... (Below threshold)

Semanticleo

When and where did AG Gonzales perjure himself?

I can help you out Hugh S. ... (Below threshold)
JFO:

I can help you out Hugh S. She's been belching up that nonsense most of the week. I challenged her on 2 posts on 2 separate occasions to demonstrate with facts her absurd assertion (which borders on an obsession) about it, as have numerous others from the left. She's never responded because she can't respond.

She thinks she's the queen of clever, and even the clever has gotten really, really old.

"But Schumer, through Co... (Below threshold)
OBGyns practicing their love:

"But Schumer, through Comey, McCarthy, McNulty, and Mueller at the CIA has controlled the Department of Justice," Paris..er,um kim

Why don't you go join your looney sister in the LA County jailpsych ward w/ your not even baked silly assed crap?

Hugh;Read t... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:
It's McNulty who perjured h... (Below threshold)
kim:

It's McNulty who perjured himself, not Gonzales.

Particularly now with Comey's appointment of Fitz under fire, the question of just why there has been so much whack politics out of the DoJ over the last six years, and the answer is that Schumer, through Comey and McNulty has exerted effective control over some of the biggest profile investigations against this administration. It took McNulty stabbing Gonzales in the back in February, as outlined by Goodling, for this administration to catch on to this little subterfuge.

Hugh S, I don't have a lot of documentation for this. McNulty, Fitzgerald, Comey, Mueller, were all from the Southern District of New York, and all knew Schumer from Judiciary Committee work. Note how closely Schumer's attack on Gonzales has fallen the line set out by McNulty in his February testimony, the perjury.

JFO is jealous.
=======================

" kim...If you've explai... (Below threshold)
OBGyns practicing their love:

" kim...If you've explained it before just link. Not trying to create more work. Would like the backstory" HughS

Hugh, there is no backstory. It's just the crazed, not even baked theory of Hilton's half-sister, even more whacked out that the dumb bitch sitting in the LA County jail psych ward.

ChrisO, JFO, and this insta... (Below threshold)
kim:

ChrisO, JFO, and this instant quack were reduced to ad homs on the last Libby thread.

Hey, SC, since you link to Fullheart, Emptyhead, why don't you ask her what she thinks of the twelve professors. I was banned at the Next Hurrah for pointing out the elephant in the room, from eRiposte's own research, that the French had discovered an active black market in Yellowcake in Africa in 1999.

I've been banned repeatedly at leftist sites, and I don't get abusive, at least not scatologically; nonetheless, I'm not tolerated.
==========================

Boy, suddenly they just don... (Below threshold)
kim:

Boy, suddenly they just don't want to talk about Joe Wilson or Val Plame anymore. Fitzgerald and Walton have been pitifully undersupervised, and the referees have just checked into the game.
=========================

Schumer, as a member of the... (Below threshold)
kim:

Schumer, as a member of the legislative branch, exerting undue influence on the bureaucracy in the Department of Justice, a part of the executive branch, is acting unconstitutionally, insidiously, and probably, criminally. As Bush says, there is an investigation in the DoJ into wrongdoing. I think that is what he is talking about, and why he was so closemouthed about the subject of the investigation. What would his administration want to investigate more, if in fact this monkey business has been going on?
=====================================

"I've been banned repeat... (Below threshold)
OBGyns practicing their love:

"I've been banned repeatedly at leftist sites" Paris' dumber sister, kim

Not surprisingly, given that the drool & slobber f**ks up the servers.

And by the way, boys and gi... (Below threshold)
kim:

And by the way, boys and girls; I'm not shocked at the vitriol spouted by the left. Worse is the desperately poor rhetoric, with even the expert rhetoricians among them willing to stoop sophistically to make a bogus point.

Name one leftist on any blog you've ever seen, even the good ones, who didn't do that.

And Semanticleo, you are good, but you are also in the top ten nastiest in my experience. What a hate filled person you are.
======================================

You know you are a teaching... (Below threshold)
kim:

You know you are a teaching case, Ob, don't you?
==========================

KP;Dunno about EW'... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

KP;

Dunno about EW's view of 12 profs. You're only banned from comments. Reading is still available.

"I've been banned repeatedly at leftist sites,"

Yeah, me too. Usually the host (Goldstein,Maguire,
ACEHole at PoliPundit) gets perturbed when I start to establish
rapport with the locals. Upsets 'em to to an extreme degree when the veneer starts to crack
(like Adam Sutler).

Apart from the fact that Pa... (Below threshold)
OBGyns practicing their love:

Apart from the fact that Paris's dumber (and uglier) sister, kim, has hijacked another thread, this bat-shit Schumer crap is merely "The Voices" playing in this madwoman's head. She makes "Loose Change" look like the epitome of reason.

"What a hate filled person ... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

"What a hate filled person you are."

Praise from Caesar.

Notice how irritated Schume... (Below threshold)
kim:

Notice how irritated Schumer's been lately about the USAttorney stuff. Goodling laid it out how McNulty set up Gonzales by perjured testimony in February. Notice that McNulty's no longer working there, and Gonzales is?

Goodling invoking her 5th amendment rights was the key. She got immunity, and used it to reveal McNulty. Bush should have let his crew invoke the 5th; him not letting them exposed his whole administration to the witchhunts.

I'd be surprised if you agreed with me. In fact, I'd be surprised if you had any reaction but the profane.
========================

SC, it's the judgement of y... (Below threshold)
kim:

SC, it's the judgement of your peers.

I wish Tom could hear your explanation of why you are banned. I remember a particularly long trek through the swamps of defamation before he dropped the hammer the last time on you. It didn't have anything to do with rapport with the horde.

That's my laugh of the day. Let's bookmark Semanticleo's justification for his banning.

In my case it definitely ain't rapport with the locals. What a joke you are. Har de har har.
===================

There is such a thing, OB, ... (Below threshold)
kim:

There is such a thing, OB, as a surfeit of learning. We are all sufficiently apprised of your potty mouth. Now, can we have some learned exhalations from the other end?
=================================

A classic case of the Flatu... (Below threshold)
OBGyns practicing their love:

A classic case of the Flatulent Anus calling the kettle black.

What? Read a site at which... (Below threshold)
kim:

What? Read a site at which I can't comment? Might just as well watch TV.
===========================

"it's the judgement of your... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

"it's the judgement of your peers."

My peers? Hoo Hah!!!

JOM has this little Star Chamber wherein they
devise strategies to exclude the opposing view.(private emails) You know, like the FORMER Majority in Congress who called meetings without Dems.

You people don't need justification, just the Bully Pulpit. Why should you read where you can't comment?

That you can ask the question is nearly, I mean,
NEARLY unfathomable.

It's hilarious when the lib... (Below threshold)
Jo:

It's hilarious when the libbies in the MSM whine about the monsters that they themselves helped create.

Too funny.

Jim:This is ex... (Below threshold)
marc:

Jim:

This is exactly the sort of terrible reporting, false accusations and refusal to admit mistakes that is the real cause for the "vitriol" Klein complains of.

And that is an valid excuse for bad language and invective how? How does any perceived or real misinformation call for anything but using correct respectful civil discourse to correct the errors?

Moreover whining about a "15 hour" delay in his response is the same type of tripe Lee, Brain and a few others around here use and completely discounts ANY possibility someone just MAY have a life that allows a constant vigil over their blog.

In short, it's childish.

"It's hilarious when the li... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"It's hilarious when the libbies in the MSM whine about the monsters that they themselves helped create.
Posted by: Jo"

C'mon now...whistling past the Peter Pace graveyard, the Albert VO5 Gonzales sepulchre, the Libby-Wolfowitz Tomb, AND the Mexican Amnesty Hell...

Refill? Southern Comfort? Jack? Or Bud in the bottle? (Let me guess: cheap vodka. Bwahaa *cough*)

I thought the 2006 election... (Below threshold)
Dirk:

I thought the 2006 election results would chill the Nutroots out a bit, but I think it has actually made them more insane.

Google 'Star Chamber', Leo.... (Below threshold)
kim:

Google 'Star Chamber', Leo.
==================

And what is 'nearly unfatho... (Below threshold)
kim:

And what is 'nearly unfathomable' is your belief in authority.
====================================

And that is an valid exc... (Below threshold)
jim:

And that is an valid excuse for bad language and invective how?

Pardon me if I smile while I type this, having been called a pretty wide manner of thigns on this very site...:)

As I said, Klein would generate a lot less vitriol if he were a bit better about writing facts.

How does any perceived or real misinformation call for anything but using correct respectful civil discourse to correct the errors?

Well, ask yourself - how much respectful, civil discourse have I myself received here, when I've been contrarian? I've been glad to get all i could, and engage in civil discussion and debate; that's far from always been the case, tho.

Jim:Pardon me ... (Below threshold)
marc:

Jim:

Pardon me if I smile while I type this, having been called a pretty wide manner of thigns on this very site...:)

As I said, Klein would generate a lot less vitriol if he were a bit better about writing facts.

You can giggle and smirk all you want, you can even play the poor little victim like you have with this response.

But after at minimum 2 times asking directly the same question and having you divert to something else tells me all I need to know.

You agree with my point but lack the intellectual honestly to do so.

In other words... your partisanship is more important than putting on a display nuts of any size to admit it.

Incivility seems have becom... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Incivility seems have become the official language of not only the blogosphere but much of mainstream political discourse as well. Maybe the final signal that anything goes was Cheney's shining "Go fuck yourself" moment in the Senate, but who knows.

The popularity of radio talkers like Limbaugh and Savage is a curious thing to me and doesn't say much for us as consumers, but then again there's always been a place reserved in our culture for hucksters, charlatans, and snake oil peddlers. But I digress.

There's plenty of witless intolerance to go around on both sides. I find the left's variety a bit more tolerable because I tend to agree with much, but not all, of what they're saying. The left also has many of its own shrill voices. I think the number of those truly in "lockstep" with either side represents a minority of the entire spectrum, with most folks somewhere in between. There are certainly factions on both sides who think it is their duty to inject a more rabid, exclusionary tone into their party. Dobson and his Christo-fascist brigade on the right fills that bill , perhaps with even more sway, than anyone on the left. Witness how well-received dissent is on this site. Angry bloggers, foul-mouthed politicians, demagoguing radio hosts mirror our general anger, intolerance and fears. It's us that we complain about so loudly.

(OK Kim=====, you can get back to your Schumer/Plame/Libby stuff now.)

Notice how the lefty Grouch... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Notice how the lefty Groucho says "witness how well-received dissent is on this site." Yeah, there is decents. Just before the meat of the argument the lefty starts with: Christo-Fascist,Hucksters, charlatans, snake oil peddlers and such. That was in just one comment. Yeah! Conservatives don't like dissent? How about giving it without the invectives? Some lefties do, but they are few. ww

Excuse me Groucho, but blam... (Below threshold)

Excuse me Groucho, but blaming anyone, however selective you are in your blamestorming, for the behavior of others is just plain lame.

Ho, ho, see what Snow said ... (Below threshold)
kim:

Ho, ho, see what Snow said about Gonzales, today? That Chuckie-Poo is pulling taffy, trying to make something out of the US Attorney mess that isn't there. I told you this was McNulty's gig.
========================

Thanks for helping prove my... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Thanks for helping prove my point, ww. Why is your fur so ruffled about people like Limbaugh and Savage being called hucksters and charlatans? Invective is their stock in trade, their poisoned golden goose. They certainly give at least as good as they get and are chuckling all the way to the bank. Defend them all you like. I dissent, you deride.

But after at minimum 2 t... (Below threshold)
jim:

But after at minimum 2 times asking directly the same question and having you divert to something else tells me all I need to know.

Whaat??

Marc, according to this page here, you asked me this question:

Assuming that's true how does that excuse being awarded the "Wanker of the Day" by Atrios for nothing more than printing a FACT?

And I showed you that what Joe Klein printed was **not** a fact. Then you asked this question:

And that is an valid excuse for bad language and invective how? How does any perceived or real misinformation call for anything but using correct respectful civil discourse to correct the errors?

Ooooh. The terribleness of incivility. Moan, moan.

I answered your question here:

Well, ask yourself - how much respectful, civil discourse have I myself received here, when I've been contrarian? I've been glad to get all i could, and engage in civil discussion and debate; that's far from always been the case, tho.

But I'm sorry if you didn't get the connection. Here's what I'm saying:

As evidenced by my own treatment here, on this very website, to say or imply that the "liberal left" is the sole owner of blame for invective and bad language, is simply not factual in any, way, shape or form.

At all.

I personally try not to ever use invective, and never use it first, and usually not 5th or even 10th. I think it's childish, makes no sense and is worse than useless towards having a discussion.

So if you want to agree that those on both the Left and Right who sink to cursing and ad hominem attacks are wrong when they do it, I agree.

BUt if you want me to agree that because some get mad at Joe Klein for being at best an awful reporter, proves that the Left is bad and evil, well that just conveniently ignores the Right doing the same thing, don't you think?

How do you excuse the bad language shown towards me, here, by the Right?

Kim quotes Rick Moran's rep... (Below threshold)
tas:

Kim quotes Rick Moran's reporting of the liberal reaction to Klein's article, "Klein is already hearing it today for daring to call the liberal blogs what they are..." "Already hearing it today" of Moran's is linked to a David Corn article on Salon about Joe Klein being nuts. I read through Corn's article and thought, "Hmmm, this all seems rather stale," since Corn talked about encounters with Klein before he was revealed to be the anonymous author of an anti-Clinton diatribe called Primary Colors. So I looked for a date when Corn's article was written, and after clicking on
"Articles by Date" at the Salon link, I found this:

"## Created by WebMap 1.0.1# Thursday, April 18, 1996 at 5:40 PM"

So to prove that the liberal blogosphere is full of anger and vitriol in it's reaction to Klein's column, Rick (and hence Kim) link to a column about Klein written 11 years ago when, ironically enough, there was no such thing as a "blog," nevermind a whole sphere of bloggers.

I think a retraction, correction, and apology is necessary here.

Jim:How do you... (Below threshold)
marc:

Jim:

How do you excuse the bad language shown towards me, here, by the Right?

I haven't and never will.

BUt if you want me to agree that because some get mad at Joe Klein for being at best an awful reporter, proves that the Left is bad and evil, well that just conveniently ignores the Right doing the same thing, don't you think?

Never said the left is "bad and evil" (like stuffing straw do you?) and while we're "conveniently ignoring" things you still ignore whatever words and actions directed at Klein weren't justified regardless of his reporting abilities.

How do you excuse the ba... (Below threshold)
jim:

How do you excuse the bad language shown towards me, here, by the Right?

I haven't and never will.

Excellent. So we're agreed there. Wonderful.

Never said the left is "bad and evil" (like stuffing straw do you?)

OK, good.

It's just that, to me, this sudden concern for how mean people are being to Joe Klein, appears to me to be an attempt to imply that liberals are bad and uncivil in ways that conservatives are not.

If that is not what you're saying, then that's great. This means we agree that both conservatives and liberals can be mean and uncivil, and that this behavior is counter-productive to what's best for America.

and while we're "conveniently ignoring" things you still ignore whatever words and actions directed at Klein weren't justified regardless of his reporting abilities.

Nope. Not ignoring it at all.

You did read this part of my statement, right?

So if you want to agree that those on both the Left and Right who sink to cursing and ad hominem attacks are wrong when they do it, I agree.

So there's your answer.

So, it appears we stand in agreement that all foul and uncivil words and actions towards anyone who is simply speaking in a public space are uncalled for, besides the point, and rude wrong behavior, no matter what the political outlook of the speaker or those who are criticizing them.

Sound good to you?

Here, I'll even be more exp... (Below threshold)
jim:

Here, I'll even be more explicit:

Those liberals who use foul language and angry attacks against Joe Klein or anyone else who's just speaking, and those conservatives who use foul language and angry attacks against liberals or anyone else who's just speaking, are wrong to do so.

Sound good?

Read Bill Whittle and the I... (Below threshold)
kim:

Read Bill Whittle and the Iterated Prisoners' Dilemma.

Be:

Nice

Retaliatory

Forgiving

Unenvious
======

But Bill, what conditions r... (Below threshold)
kim:

But Bill, what conditions reveal the truth, not just max pris benes?
================================

David Corn thought Joe Klei... (Below threshold)
kim:

David Corn thought Joe Klein was nuts eleven years ago? This is why I read through threads, sometimes, for unexpected nuggets of hilarity and breakthrough insights.
=============================

So Kim, you're telling me t... (Below threshold)
tas:

So Kim, you're telling me that you don't read or check the dates on items that you link to?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy