Besides being paranoid, the idea that McCain's genuinely weak "Celeb" ad draws from Triumph of the Will is remarkable for something else: its implicit contempt for modern Germans. It is not much better than the pro-war German-bashing that took place during 2002-03 when war supporters frequently complained that the Germans had lost their former enthusiasm for conflict. Both treat Germans in an essentialist way and try to reduce them to the most cartoonish stereotypes, as if a cheering throng of Germans in Berlin, c. 2008, must necessarily conjure up associations with Nazi rallies. To assume this says more about the critics of the ad than about the people who made it. As for the notion that the images from the ad resemble the techniques of Riefenstahl, one might as well accuse the television news directors who covered the event of imputing Hitlerism to Obama, since the footage and camera angles are all taken from the news broadcasts of the speech. Obama supporters haven't been this good at embarrassing their candidate with hysterical commentary since Orlando Patterson felt compelled to compare Hillary Clinton's "3 a.m." ad to Birth of a Nation.I agree, and I think my remarks on this point were badly-put. I should have said that the only similarity between the footage in the ad and Triumph of the Will is the presence of German landmarks and German crowds, and thus that if liberals are silly enough to see overtones of Hitler they should blame the organizers of Obama's itinerary - rather than implying, as I think my phrasing seemed too, that there actually are overtones of Nuremberg in the footage.
« Is Slate Conservative? | Main | The Process of Government » Dreaming of Hitler01 Aug 2008 02:32 pm
Daniel Larison makes a good point:
Comments (103)
So do you reject and denounce the whole thesis of Liberal Fascism? (And is Feminazi a term of endearment?) Because I think it's reasonable for liberals to try to use the published remarks of one of the leading lights, so to speak, of the Republican brain trust as a way of interpreting Republican political ads which otherwise are kind of inane and pointless and hard to figure. Johah is full of it, as I think Ross would agree. But to go by the discourse, the majority of Republican operatives see the world the way Johah does - or at least would like to describe the world the way Johan does, regardless of their true beliefs. 
lampwick hopes: "Johah is full of it, as I think Ross would agree." What leads you to this conclusion? Ross has avoided reviewing Goldberg's flatulent tome. Ross links to (and apparently is a friend of) white supremacist Steve Sailer. Why is there a tendency to give Ross Goebbels Douthat the benefit of a doubt he hasn't earned?
The new official Republican line is that Obama is trying to start a "race war". Tell me again who's paranoid and idiotic.
Is "Obama = Hitler" going to be the subtitle of the paperback edition of GNP?
299 comments on this mild and unremarkable attack ad. Parsing that might be more instructive than parsing the frigging ad.
"The new official Republican line is that Obama is trying to start a "race war"." Obama's Philadelphia speech on race was when he set back race relations by twenty years. All to protect Wright and his own political future. Remember, he threw Wright under the bus, not because of what he said every Sunday in church, or his more recent incendiary remarks at the Press Club or the NAACP, but because, in Obama's words "He disrespected me". It's all about Obama. The liberals in the USA need to wake up to who they are supporting. For the true believers, the Obamites, it is to late.
davod writes: "The liberals in the USA need to wake up to who they are supporting. For the true believers, the Obamites, it is to late." As a member of the reality-based community and someone who knew 8 years ago what a cheap, stupid, and worthless bastard Dumbya Bush was, I can tell you that the last thing I need is advice from moronic Republicans about who to vote for. A vote for McCain is a vote for at least 4 more years of incompetent, malignant stupidity in the White House. You evidently like the state of this country today. I do not. Obama is far from perfect but your candidate is a senile disgrace who has been sucking up to the worst people in the country for the past 7-8 years. No thanks.
It's true Davod. Nearly every commenter on the left or on the right observed that in Philadelphia Obama gave a divisive speech which did nothing but set race relations back at least twenty years (to 1988 - who was president then?). In my eyes Obama is a perfectly ordinary politician, who seems great only by comparison with the abomination we have lived under for the past eight years. Why do supporters like myself seem bewitched to you? In Obama I see ability, intelligence, and eloquence; I guess you see nothin' but good ole African-American hoodoo-voodoo.
Why do supporters like myself seem bewitched to you? In Obama I see ability, intelligence, and eloquence; I guess you see nothin' but good ole African-American hoodoo-voodoo. I see an articulate lawyer in early middle age who appears to have spent north of 80% of his working life in the realms of electoral and extra-parliamentary politics (and the bulk of that in Chicago). Not the optimal background for a rather demanding job in civil administration.
lampwick says: "In my eyes Obama is a perfectly ordinary politician, who seems great only by comparison with the abomination we have lived under for the past eight years." Well said. That most conservatives STILL think the Dumbya-Cheney catastrophe has been a success reveals just how twisted and necrotic the "conservative movement" as become. It's not just that it's time for that movement to die. It's already dead. We just need to chop it off before it kills the rest of the body politic.
"Badly put" was the least of it. Also remember that adverbs ending in "ly" generally are not hyphenated.
Maybe the ad was intended to cause rabid, self-destructive behavior among Obama supporters, and use that negative energy to scare everyone else off. In that, the ad appears to be successful. Side note: If Larison, et al. want to appeal to the working class, and suppose that there's a party of Sam's Club, then they shouldn't be so high-minded about these ads. Not that critics aren't technically correct that the ad is weak, beneath McCain, blah blah, and not that there isn't an element of middle- or lowbrow appeal. But, really, no kidding. It's an election. One with regular voters. Not sure how all of this reconciles with the aim of securing the bubba vote. If any of you wish to discuss the Democrat party's use of race in elections, that's a can of worms I'd be happy to open.
Art Deco writes: "I see an articulate lawyer in early middle age who appears to have spent north of 80% of his working life in the realms of electoral and extra-parliamentary politics (and the bulk of that in Chicago). Not the optimal background for a rather demanding job in civil administration." What sort of background would you prefer, Artie?
Gordon Lightfoot - Canadians aren't allowed to vote in US elections, so I don't see why your views are of any particular interest here. "The Wreck of the Edmond Fitzgerald" was a pretty good song, though.
"What sort of background would you prefer, Artie?" C'mon, you already know the answer to that... A war hero and regular guy, with a deep Christian faith and a keen mind... like Dubya...
First, to Douthat: thanks. I'm glad you realized your last post was as ugly as it was. this is a welcome clarification... can we hope that this won't happen again? Art Deco: "299 comments on this mild and unremarkable attack ad. Parsing that might be more instructive than parsing the frigging ad." what, you think that's an accident? Don't be a dupe; McCain's ad people certainly aren't. the ad had exactly the effect they intended it to have. Art Deco: "I see an articulate lawyer in early middle age who appears to have spent north of 80% of his working life in the realms of electoral and extra-parliamentary politics (and the bulk of that in Chicago). Not the optimal background for a rather demanding job in civil administration." Sure, but compared to who? John McCain, the ultimate senate gasbag? At least obama has some executive experience and some experience in the business and academic worlds. don't forget that until 2004 he was holding down three jobs as a constitutional law professor, working at a law firm, and serving in the Illinois state senate. before that he was a community organizer and ran voter registration drives. this is relevant experience.
dadanarchist says: "A war hero and regular guy, with a deep Christian faith and a keen mind... like Dubya..." He'll probably award himself a Medal of Honor for that night in Alabama when he courageously downed 23 shots of Maker's Mark and 11 Budweisers in order to keep them out of the hands of the enemy. Nam was hell.
In the Reconstruction Era, southern Democrats used to accuse Republicans of "Negro Worship" (well, that wasn't the word they used). Here we are, 140 years later, and though the names of the parties have been reversed, the charge is still the same. Obama is, as I said, a perfectly respectable American politician who happens to be black. The urban hipsters who back him are notoriously removed and ironic cold fish. The good people of Iowa, Idaho, Alaska, etc. who chose him over Hillary are not known for their enthusiasm. And his African-American supporters have a right to be excited about him. So where does this image of Obama as a cult-leader come from? The ugly depths of American racial atavism, that's where.
So where does this image of Obama as a cult-leader come from? The ugly depths of American racial atavism You need to get your imagination under control. don't forget that until 2004 he was holding down three jobs as a constitutional law professor, working at a law firm, He was an adjunct faculty member (with the title of 'lecturer') and has little or no record of scholarly publication. One should describe the Senator's achievements (which are satisfactory within a certain frame of reference) precisely. I would refer you to William Dyer's blog ("BeldarBlog") on the subject of his legal career, most particularly with regard to what was implied by his selection of constitutional law as a teaching specialty.
So where's Artie's splendidly cogent description of the background he would prefer for a candidate? ::crickets::
Art Deco: "He was an adjunct faculty member (with the title of 'lecturer') and has little or no record of scholarly publication." if you really want to a pedantic prick about it, it was 'Senior Lecturer.' Which, as defined by the University of Chicago law school, is as follows: "Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching." QED. Since you ignored the main point of my post in favor of semantic quibbling, let me say it again. Obama has a wealth of experience outside of government in a variety of different fields. His opponent, John McCain, has none whatsoever. Obama has run organizations in an executive capacity. John McCain has not. These differences are directly relevant to the Presidency.
Here is the oath of office: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." For the past eight years we've had a president who thought that the word 'execute' meant 'abuse', and who forgot that the primary object of his concern was supposed to be the Constitution. So who is better qualified to replace him and undo all the damage he inflicted on the office of president and the Constitution? A former naval aviator who finished near the very bottom of his class, and who as a lawmaker is best known for passing legislation aimed at discouraging the sort of bribery he regularly engaged in early in his Senate career? Or a former head of the Harvard Law Review who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago at the same time he was teaching people how to pull themselves up and become better citizens out in the streets of Chicago?
Beldar and some of his commenters discuss the likely origin of the promotion to 'Senior Lecturer'. It is not pedantic at all to point out his lack of scholarly publications. That is a good chunk of what college teachers do, and how the strata of the academic world are discerned. It depends on what's up in one's district, but as a rule, being a state legislator is as demanding as you want to make it.
Obama was an extraparliamentary politician. That he was not drawing a government salary is of secondary importance or scant importance. School teachers, Naval officers, and (quite commonly) civil engineers work within the confines of public bureaucracies and that is going to affect the take they have on political economy. However, they are not interchangeable with eachother, much less with politicians. I think it would be more accurate to say that Mr. Obama had experience not in a variety of fields but with a variety of modes of operation in the same field ('community organizing', 'civil rights law', and electoral politics). A candidate's background and experience are things to consider, but do not make up for deficits in policy preferences or more intangible qualities. Jimmy Carter and the elder George Bush had impressive backgrounds: politics was a second or third career for these men and they had performed competently in realms (the military and the business world) which have more robust operational measures of competence than does the political life. Both had executive experience and Mr. Carter in addition had a strong interest in the technics of public administration. They had countervailing defects, however.
Deco, He was called 'senior lecturer' and was offered track to tenure - it's stated clearly in their own documents. McCain fits your standards does he? and if not, is he a superior candidate or inferior to Obama? very simple question. I don't expect a straight answer, but a non patronising response would be nice.
Lampwick, in recent decades, the appellate courts in the country have asserted an effective right to annul any piece of legislation they care to if they can craft a suitably verbose excuse. A reductio ad absurdam of their trail of opinions was one issued by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts a few years back to the effect that the language of an organic law composed in 1784 requires county clerks to issue marriage licenses to pairs of dudes. A federal district judge in Missouri and appellate courts in New Jersey have appropriated to themselves the right to levy taxes and a federal judge in New York was permitted, by the U.S. Marshall Service, to throw most of the city council of Yonkers, N.Y. in jail because he did not care for the configuration of public housing in that city. As of now, the federal Supreme Court is in the business of seizing war powers. You might just compare Article I of the federal constitution, wherein the powers delegated to Congress are enumerated, with the actual activities of the U.S. Congress. Complaints about the activities of Mr. Addington and Prof. Yoo are, in context, contrived.
Art Nouveau Riche I'm not in trade. Your're three generations off.
I think Mr. McCain's 22 years in the Navy and 26 years in the federal legislature trump Mr. Obama's ten years in various legislatures, his somewhat dilettentish career as a teacher and lawyer, and his dozen years as a salaried public nuisance.
At least that's clear now. Shame you weren't posting so extensively when Bush was running in 2000.
Art. Experience does not nessecarily compensate for outlook. in 2000 McCain was the best man for the Job. Now I'm not so sure. I like what Obama Has to say. Can we elect them both? Obama for President McCain for Vice? I'm joking but both candidates are stellar.
Art: Ah yes, if it were only 1784. Unfortunately I won't be able to stick around for your no doubt spirited defense of Sen. McCain's intellectual qualifications. I'll let you have the last two-hundred-and-twenty-four words.
Ross and conservatives in general are being helped when liberals over-analyze the McCain Paris/Britney attack ad. The over-analysis gives conservatives an openeing to mock those ever over-sensitive liberals, when instead they should be acknowledging the obvious - that it is strange that McCain would put a video montage of Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, and Barack Obama in an ad. The attention of all decent people on the left and the right should instead be on the McCain campaign, asking them why this very peculiar sequence was chosen in a highly produced political ad. Liberals should not answer this question; that diverts attention. McCain should answer the question. He made the choice to associate Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, and Barack Obama. I have seen a McCain flack answer this question, and the answer tells it all in its obvious evasiveness. 'why, they are all celebrities, that's why we put them together' I think Ross Douthat and anyone else with a brain knows that Paris Hilton and Britney Spears have a particular type of celebrity, and it is really up to McCain to now be a bit more specific as to what it is about Barack Obama that is similar to, of all people, Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. As a thought experiment, perhaps McCain defenders should imagine a video montage of Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and John McCain. How adequate would an explanation from an Obama aide that 'well, they are all political leaders, that is what we are saying'. How about a video-montage of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, and Cindy and John McCain because after all, they are all adulterers. I know that it is easy for a decent conservative like Ross to pile onto liberals who go overboard in their outrage, but his very decency requires him to do the hard work of asking why John McCain is running that ad.
but his very decency requires him to do the hard work of asking why John McCain is running that ad. Waaal, he is a politican running for office and wishes to deflate his opponent. Workin' hard here.
tomtom says: "I know that it is easy for a decent conservative like Ross to pile onto liberals who go overboard in their outrage, but his very decency requires him to do the hard work of asking why John McCain is running that ad." I don't think that being less of an asshole than, say, Rush Limbaugh is enough to qualify someone as "decent." Ross has shown many times that he has (at best) a tainted sensibility when it comes to racial questions. He defends racists more often than he offers a discouraging word about the more disgusting actions of the Bush administration, for example. If that's what being "decent" amounts to these days then standards have fallen very low indeed.
Art Deco: "A candidate's background and experience are things to consider, but do not make up for deficits in policy preferences or more intangible qualities." I agree with you there! McCain is a primitive, simple-minded, angry, explosive, major league asshole. These dangerous personal qualities should alone disqualify him from the Presidency.
I always that doing your best to imitate Jesus was a good thing. I guess I was wrong!
Well MoeLarry, since you dismissed McCain's tenure in North Vietnamese POW camps, I'll have to conclude you only like POWs when they kill Americans. Tell me again about the poor Gitmo detainees.
"I should have said that the only similarity between the footage in the ad and Triumph of the Will is the presence of German landmarks and German crowds, and thus that if liberals are silly enough to see overtones of Hitler they should blame the organizers of Obama's itinerary - rather than implying, as I think my phrasing seemed too, that there actually are overtones of Nuremberg in the footage." So if Republicans are running around crying 'Hitler' --- this is Obama's fault? Take responsibility for what your guys are saying. And it's the McCain campaign, not just some fringe nuts: http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/sparring_over_mccain_ads.php
Actually, John McCain has shown leadership and organizational capabilities far beyond anything Barack Obama is capable of, and it's all on the record. After the war, and before McCain became a Navy Liason officer in the Senate, McCain was assigned to VA-174 in 1976 at Cecil Field in Jacksonville. At this time, the Reductions in Force had effected all the armed services, including the Navy. VA-174 had A-7 Corsairs which could not fly and men who were not ready to fly them. McCain, over the following year and a half, beg, borrowed, or stole the parts needed to get his aircraft in the air and his attack group as near to 100% readiness as possible. He was widely respected by his men. His unit was transformed from a sad sack outfit to one that was ready to fight. That was a remarkable job for a relatively junior officer working within a hollowed-out Navy. Nothing Obama has done equals that achievement. Nothing. The command of a naval attack squadron is one thing. Getting a squadron transformed from flat on its back to ready to go to war in the Seventies (when very few units outside of the Submarine Navy could say that) was simply remarkable. McCain would not go on to other command. McCain's family name was known within the Navy, and was soon noticed by Admiral James Holloway, the Chief of Naval Operations, and was sent to Capitol Hill as liason to the U.S. Senate for the Navy. He was, after all, the grandson of the John McCain who had commanded Halsey's fast carriers in the Pacific during the Big War, and there were still (in those days) a lot of Senators left over from that era. Thanks, but when Obama starts handing out loaves and fishes at his rallies, I might take another look. However, McCain has shown critical command capabilities at several times in his life, especially at this time in Jacksonville after the Vietnam War. This is something Barack simply hasn't done. Not that Obama couldn't do it; he just hasn't done it.
section9 writes: "He was widely respected by his men. His unit was transformed from a sad sack outfit to one that was ready to fight. That was a remarkable job for a relatively junior officer working within a hollowed-out Navy. Nothing Obama has done equals that achievement. Nothing. The command of a naval attack squadron is one thing. Getting a squadron transformed from flat on its back to ready to go to war in the Seventies (when very few units outside of the Submarine Navy could say that) was simply remarkable. McCain would not go on to other command. McCain's family name was known within the Navy, and was soon noticed by Admiral James Holloway, the Chief of Naval Operations, and was sent to Capitol Hill as liason to the U.S. Senate for the Navy. He was, after all, the grandson of the John McCain who had commanded Halsey's fast carriers in the Pacific during the Big War, and there were still (in those days) a lot of Senators left over from that era." McCain left the Navy when it became obvious that he would never be promoted to Admiral - perhaps due to his sloppy personal life and his habit of crashing planes. Claims that he was some sort of great commander who "transformed a sad sack outfit to one that was ready to fight" are easy to make since they never had to fight. His personal and family history seem impressive but lots of observers seem to have been unimpressed, since he never got that big promotion. When Obama kicks the living crap out of McCain on Election Day it will be an accomplishment that will dwarf anything Johnny Mac has done in his life, and it will be the best thing for a country almost ruined by 8 years of retarded, amoral, evil Repiglicans infecting the White House. Poor McCain missed his shot when the Bushpigs raped him in South Carolina in 2000. No question he would have been a better choice that Dumbya, but it was not to be. Now he's too old to do the job, and he's too compromised to deserve it because he's been sucking Bush's offal for too long.
Jay again: "He manages to destroy any dialogue at all with his troops hating, misogynistic, intolerance for anyone who doesn't spend the day on Daily Kos and the Huffington Post. Don't you have a game of Dungeons and Dragon to get to, Mama boy?" Never played it, chuckles. But tell me - why do you hate America's proud tradition? Why do you support the cowardly punks like Dumbya and Cheney who have disgraced us so? Maybe one day you'll wake up and realize what amoral, un-American tapeworms you and your genocidal, warmongering pals have been. But it will probably happen when you're in prison.
McCain Camp charges Racism after the McCain Camp ran an web-cam ad on their website with Obama on the dollar bill and with his face on the statue of liberty and on all four faces of Mt Rushmore! This is what Obama is responding to — when he made the comment that he does not look like the other Presidents on the U.S. currency -- this ad showed the Ben Franklin and George Washington faces fade to Obama on currency -- Miss Liberty fade to Obama and -- the four faces on Mt. Rushmore fade to Obama. So when Obama responds to the McCain web video, McCain hollers Racism! Such hypocrisy or an evil genuis? How come the Media is not reporting the WHOLE story? Obama Aide Concedes 'Dollar Bill' Remark Referred to His Race
davod quotes and writes: ""Maybe one day you'll wake up and realize what amoral, un-American tapeworms you and your genocidal, warmongering pals have been. But it will probably happen when you're in prison." A statement which could equally be appllied to some of His relatives in Africa. Especially the one he supported during the elections in Kenya. Only then it would be declared racist and out of bounds." No, it would just be declared a non sequitur and you'd be mocked as the delusional wingnut you are. I'm sorry your candidate is a senile old goat with poor impulse control, but it could be worse. You could have been stuck with Rudy Giuliani, who also has a problem with impotence and who hires child molestors. There were just no good GOP options this year. Your gang didn't deserve any.
if liberals see the overtones of Hitler? I've never heard liberals connect Obama to Hitler. That's been a strictly republican insinuation. Ross, you just lost my respect for that typical republican disingenuousness.
Both treat Germans in an essentialist way and try to reduce them to the most cartoonish stereotypes, as if a cheering throng of Germans in Berlin, c. 2008, must necessarily conjure up associations with Nazi rallies. Look, like it or not, it's going to be a long time before a cheering throng of Germans in Berlin doesn't conjure up Nazi associations. Sorry but you can't wash away the stain that quickly.
Besides being paranoid, the idea that McCain's genuinely weak "Celeb" ad draws from Triumph of the Will is remarkable for something else: its implicit contempt for modern Germans. Larison and Douthat usually smart, but they actually buy this, they're being way more paranoid than even anyone else in this argument, left or right.
Correcting myself: Besides being paranoid, the idea that McCain's genuinely weak "Celeb" ad draws from Triumph of the Will is remarkable for something else: its implicit contempt for modern Germans. Larison and Douthat are usually smart, but if they actually buy this, they're being way more paranoid than anyone else in this argument, left or right.
"Look, like it or not, it's going to be a long time before a cheering throng of Germans in Berlin doesn't conjure up Nazi associations. Sorry but you can't wash away the stain that quickly." Obama went to Germany to preach to a cheering throng of Germans in a martial setting. McCain's ad., at the very least, may make the Obamites think twice about including the footage in any mass advertising campaign. McCain may have done the Obamites a favor by bringing this to their attention early in the campaign. Mind you, Obama's Berlin sermon probably achieved its intented effect, that of increasing the amount of foreign donations.
Comparing Ross to Goebbels is inaccurate. He's more like Albert Speer circa 1950 - the "good" Nazi, with some dirty little secrets and a refusal to analyze aspects of the past too closely, masked by a rhetoric of reason. Look at his book - no analysis of what the policies he advocates might do in hard, quantifiable terms - just a demand for anything that could grub up votes for the Greasy Old Pedophiles.
Angelo, So Ross is a good Nazi, and not the bad kind. Thanks for clearing that up. And since you're such a close reader of his book, maybe you could provide an example of one of the policies that he and Reihan offer that lack the sort of analysis you describe. Thanks.
"Actually, John McCain has shown leadership and organizational capabilities far beyond anything Barack Obama is capable of, and it's all on the record." I find it incredible that creating the greatest political money raising and volunteer organization of our lifetimes is not worth mentioning. There is no doubt, until obama came along, democrats were doomed to have less money than republicans. How can you overlook what is happening right now? It is amazing and will define political fund raising in the US for the next decade. Even if he loses, Obama is going to control the Democratic party through his control of the money flow for a long, long time. McCain has nothing in his resume that is even close to this.
mickslam writes: "McCain has nothing in his resume that is even close to this." Well, McCain did try to kill himself. Twice. And that may be understandable given his circumstances at the time. But can you imagine the roar of the hoohah from the wingnuts if a Democratic candidate had that history?
Of course, "MosesLeninAndJudas" is a troll. Too bad "Atlantic" doesn't police its comments. If it did, more intelligent commentators would join in. But given the Trollish hate and bile, the chance for more elevated discussion is zero.
Did I just see pablo Hitler lump Moses in with Lenin and Judas? I did! pablo Hitler calling someone else a troll is like Jeffrey Dahmer calling someone a "danger to society." I'll add that pablo Hitler has never made a single cogent point in his Atlantic posts.
I hadn't read a comments thread on this blog previously. This one is notably petty and substance-free - appropriate, I guess, since the purported topic is the Britney-Paris ad.
Maybe he's getting the intern to post while he secures his office for the invasion of the black man coming to blog. I still hope it's a tantrum, especially given the Obama posts were Ross saying don't throw a tantrum.
"especially anyone who's peddling a grand new agenda for one of the two political parties"
Bit more peddling and a lot less pandering needed, it seems.
Hack - take a look at Ross's latest post. No comments allowed. Playtime is over, but Blogger and Typepad have free blogs, so I look forward to reading your insights elsewhere. Keep in touch. Ditto MLJ and James.
Maybe this is why no comments for the most recent post: From Steve Sailer: Flunking The Big Test: Nicholas Lemann's book on the SAT fails to make the grade for moral seriousness. Gee, why does Steve think that? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/interviews/lemann.html You said Carl Brigham wrote the SAT. Was he a racist? Shame Ross doesn't link to this guy more often. He seems pretty sharp.
TWO commentless posts! One less venue for Steve Sailer!
Its sort of disheartening that we can no longer leave comments due to the pig-headedness of a few people lacking in objectivity and tact. It seems that the blogosphere has de-generated into a miltonesque panoply of your-mama jokes that revolve around a person's politics. How sad.
Sorn writes: "Its sort of disheartening that we can no longer leave comments due to the pig-headedness of a few people lacking in objectivity and tact." Spare me the sanctimony. I think Dumbya Bush is a war criminal. You don't. How is your view more "objective" than mine? If the comments are gone it's due to a distaste for free speech on the part of the conservative "owner" of this blog. The only commentator here who was not afraid of free speech was Matt Yglesias, the "liberal." I hope Mr. Coates follows in that tradition, and not in Ross's trembling footsteps.
What does the belief or lack therof of Bush as a "War Criminal" have to do with objectivity? Moe think about what I said about war crimes for just a minute. The term War Criminal is a way for the winner of a conflict to prosecute the loser. Every Nation ever involved in war has been guilty of War Crimes. What don't you understand about that?
Still, It doesn't do anything to insult people. What good does it serve?
Sorn, if they are turned off, it's not from the insults. It's because Ross repeatedly linked to, quoted from, and plagiarized off Steve Sailer, and made repeatedly racial posts while trying to claim otherwise. He's possibly descended from Douthat's in Va who owned nearly a hundred slaves, but has never admitted or denied that, yet felt compelled http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/conservatives_and_liberal_guil.php to say he felt shame (which means you don't have to do anything about it) rather than guilt. Yet repeatedly he posts about these things, calling an elderly black woman a welfare duchess, calling a black woman Princeton graduate effectively an idiot because she didn't get down on her knees and say she was there for affirmative action - of course, no Douthat in history benefited in the past from laws benefiting one race over another. He's full of it. And he was fine when people were posting racist bilge bolstered with pseudo-science - it was just when those racists were impersonated, it became a trauma. If you look at the Hitler/Obama posts - the only comment to be cut was the parody Steve Sailer. That should tell you something. I really hope his comments are gone for good.
On the plus side - Coates blog has just gone live it seems. Ross has yet to acknowledge his existence. Classy.
James, Good grief, didn't mean to get your Irish up. I wasn't talking about status, and I'm sure you earn more than me. I was referring more to talent level. I obviously don't write for a living either, so don't get bent out of shape about that either. By the way, Marine is capitalized. I knew I liked PL for some reason. Oh, and MoeLarry, Jesus loves you, but everyone else thinks you're an a-hole. And I don't condone torture.
Ferret claims: "I don't condone torture." Really? Who did you vote for in 2004? A vote for Bush was a vote for torture. If you voted for him, you condoned torture. You can tell yourself otherwise all day long, but you'd be lying.
Ross, Re Your New Post - since it seems you have turned off comments; McCain should run on the surge! with Vitter as Veep! just a few more days and all the comments will be out of the way, and you can eat cupcakes in peace with Ambinder.
Is it a coincidence that Douthat shuts off comments just as Coates arrives at The Atlantic?
JDB asks: "Is it a coincidence that Douthat shuts off comments just as Coates arrives at The Atlantic?" No more than it's a coincidence that he hasn't posted a welcome for Coates yet. Coates has called Steve Sailer a racist in the past and Ross must not be happy about the choice. Also Ross will be working very hard for the McCain ticket over the next three months and he doesn't want any anti-GOP comments under his byline. A real profile in courage!
If you guys stick around, Coates shouldn't enable comments either. Not sure what connection JDB is trying to make, but okay. And your comments won't swing the election, so don't give yourselves too much credit. In the name of Buckley, Limbaugh and Saint Reagan, best of luck to all of you in November. Goodbye. - Bushpig
Ross, And please don't think that you're on par with Sullivan or Ambinder for moving to a comments free format. Going comments free can be a perfectly respectable move - and if you're a capable blogger you'll still attract a sizable following even without comments. But when you do it to quash criticism that's deserved (as you have in this case) it exposes you for the hack that you are.
Ross disabled comments?!?!? Oh noes!!! Oh well, less ranting into the ether, but more Dungeons and Dragons! Just hope mom doesn't start making me pay rent!
Not sure what connection JDB is trying to make, but okay. I just found it bizzare that he turned off comments without explanation, particularly when the last several threads haven't been exceptionally nasty or anything. Coates' arrival is the only change I can detect.
As opposed to left-wing echo chambers, right "Ross can't handle ..."? I guess Michael Savage is right that liberalism is a mental disorder - when someone disagrees with you, they're not as open-minded as you, and haven't thought about the issues as clearly as you. Crybaby.
MoeLarryandJesus, Do you think Truman was a war criminal?
"Do you think Truman was a war criminal?" No, but it's certainly arguable that he was. I don't think the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings are clear-cut war crimes because it was certainly possible that Japan would not have surrendered without them, and a land invasion would have been catastrophic. My Lai didn't even arguably advance any legitimate war aims. The war on Iraq is a war crime in and of itself because there was no good reason for it, and the Bushpigs knew this. They lied us into it. I'll happily call Lyndon Johnson a war criminal, though, for the callous way he used the Gulf of Tonkin non-incident to do the same thing Dumbya did - lie us into a war. Look at the rationale for the Nuremberg trials and maybe even you can learn to distinguish a war crime from a legitimate act of war.
I don't see why Ross didn't just perma-ban MoeLarryAndJesus and James and their IP addresses. Pretty much everyone else here refrains from vulgarity and flaming when disagreeing with Ross. I've never seen anyone except Moe suggest to other commenters that they deserve severe physical beatings. But, it looks like the decision has already been made. Good luck to Ross and good luck to everyone else.
Fair enough, Moe. Fair enough. Now why couldn't you respond like that in so many other posts? Maybe then the comments wouldn't have been banned. Oh, right. The personality disorder...
You can't take criticism of ridiculous positions Ha Ha!
Philip: Well, I DO think Truman was a war criminal. To conciously nuke two targets with around 200 thousend innocent civilians, is a war crime, and if you don´t want to get legalistic, simply pure mass murder
So I guess you will wait till posts with comments are off your front page before you make a brave statement about them. Will that be when you acknowledge Ta-Nehisi? You're a joke, and I knew Reihan was naïve, but to not see you for what you are is really dumb of him.
And I still stand by the slavery statement: DOUTHAT ranks # 45482 in terms of the most common surnames in the United States for 2000. Now, given how few there are even now, there is a good chance you are directly related from the Douthat's that owned nearly 100 slaves. Fine. Lot of Americans did. Not that many, but even so. However, most of those people don't post repeatedly on race, go on about how it's ok for people to have been racist in the past, yet somehow you think you wouldn't - e.g. Segregation in the 50s etc. And you also felt compelled to say you felt shame but not guilt. hmmm. So, despite your family perhaps benefiting from the biggest affirmative action program in history - slavery - you feel compelled to call a Ivy league graduate all but stupid/deceptive by not mentioning AA. Gee, I wonder why? You are a flat out racist like Sailer, but where he is lacking in intelligence, you are lacking in courage, because you can't even come out and say the same things - you're doing what your hero Buckley did; not changing your view, but just keeping quiet. If I'm completely wrong, then it would be easy to prove. But if I am, why are you so obsessed with race?
No more comments? Then I'm out.
As opposed to left-wing echo chambers, right "Ross can't handle ..."? I guess Michael Savage is right that liberalism is a mental disorder - when someone disagrees with you, they're not as open-minded as you, and haven't thought about the issues as clearly as you. Crybaby. Spare me. Most times I attempt to comment on the odd conservative blog I come across, the comments are either disabled, or are moderated to such an obsessive degree that even the mildest criticisms are either never posted or vanish right quick. Yet you believe libs have the mental disorder - g'luck with that, chum.
really? writes: "Most times I attempt to comment on the odd conservative blog I come across, the comments are either disabled, or are moderated to such an obsessive degree that even the mildest criticisms are either never posted or vanish right quick." Check out Conservapedia sometime. They'll ban anyone at any time for the slightest perceived "liberal tendencies." Just a complete jokapedia. Wikipedia's bad, but Schlafly's site's just pure agenda.
This is like watching a beached whale take its last breaths. Get your shots in at Ross while you can, peons.
Go bye bye, Hack. So long, farewell, until we meet aga-a-a-ain.
It's funny to watch you clowns fume about Ross’ decision. This site used to provide an excellent forum for an exchange of views, primarily because of the intelligent comments by liberals that disagreed with Ross. I never expected that ML&J’s style would take over the comments section. But the copycats like James, DTC, etc continued the foul language, personal attacks, and weak content in so many of the comments that Ross rightly shut everything down. It's impossible to have an effective debate with relentless ad hominem and vulgarity, and it’s bad faith for anyone to pretend otherwise. Civility is a basic requirement of any serious discussion. But discussion was never really the point, was it? All the accusations about Ross being a racist or torture-lover were just to shut down debate. And DTC, it’s laughable for you to suggest that you’re pleased that Ross shutoff comments. You wouldn’t waste time writing more juvenile comments if you didn’t want a forum. You’re a liar in addition to being a lightweight. The most shameful part is that none of the trolls have the courage to use their full name. Instead they make their attacks hiding behind a nickname. Truly cowards of the worst sort. I’ll still be reading Ross.
Doogie Howser writes: "All the accusations about Ross being a racist or torture-lover were just to shut down debate." The accusation that Ross is a racist is based on his own words and his bizarre attachment to and affection for the vile white supremacist Steve Sailer. I don't recall anyone accusing Ross of being a torture lover, though he is a Republican, and support for torture is currently a GOP given. Blame them. Many of the regular conservative posters here were called torture-lovers because that's what they are. Love Dick Cheney, love torture. There's no getting around that. Do the math.
James T. Harris, Assuming that is your real name, am I meant to know who you are?
Well James, why don't you Google him and see if his ancestors owned slaves.
If he makes repeated posts on race I might Gordon. I thought you'd left. The air seemed a lot lighter.
Oh, Gordon - since you seem unable to read: The most shameful part is that none of the trolls have the courage to use their full name. Instead they make their attacks hiding behind a nickname. Truly cowards of the worst sort.
The decision to close the comments will leave at least 3-4 hours open in MLJ's daily schedule...and for that reason alone it makes me happy. Ideally, mlj and similar posters could be blocked so that the adults could converse, because there are a number of interesting and thoughtful people who commented on this blog. However, there was little benefit to the current comment section. Most people refrained from commenting, and anyone new to the site ended up engaging in pointless back and forth with MLJ...the uber-troll...
kab claims: "Ideally, mlj and similar posters could be blocked so that the adults could converse, because there are a number of interesting and thoughtful people who commented on this blog." Naturally you don't say who they were. I can't say I recall your name. Given that the host of this blog thinks Steve Sailer is "interesting and thoughtful," though, I suspect we have very different interpretations of what that phrase means.
I just wanted to stop by and say that it's been an honor and a privilege to impersonate one of the internet's most prolific and entertaining trolls. I'd like to thank Moe and Ross, obviously. But I'd also like to thank the good people at www.theatlantic.com. From their non-existent moderation; to their ineffective, arbitrary and way-too-late attempts to police comments; to their utter indifference to the crippling problem of trolls impersonating other posters; I can truly say that I could not have made my contribution to Ross' blog without their invaluable assistance. Moe, I hope you understand that, far from being a Bushpig, I am your kindred spirit. Opinion journalism is a cesspool, and the opinion journalism on blogs and in blog comments is particularly foul. I enjoyed racing to the bottom with you.
A self-admitted fraud says: "Moe, I hope you understand that, far from being a Bushpig, I am your kindred spirit. Opinion journalism is a cesspool, and the opinion journalism on blogs and in blog comments is particularly foul. I enjoyed racing to the bottom with you." Oh, you're a Bushpig. Everything you said or did while impersonating me supported the worthless motherfuckers. I play with "cesspool" language, mostly because it seems appropriate when dealing with shitbags like Dumbya and Dickless and their supporters. You swim on the bottom because you enjoy swallowing shit. We're very different. Go Cheney yourself.
Now I feel bad. I thought you were having as much fun with it as I was. If I'd known that your use of foul language and your compulsive reference to unusual sexual acts was just an expression of genuine concern with policy issues and the future of our country I never would have impersonated you in the first place. Please accept my sincere apology for offending your delicate sensibilities and for distracting everyone from a fruitful discussion of the issues of the day.
I play with "cesspool" language, mostly because it seems appropriate when dealing with shitbags like Dumbya and Dickless and their supporters. Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity.
Marshall mcluhans: "Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity." The notion that there is never any genuine moral indignation can only be held by a moral cripple. Dick Cheney is today's most obvious example of a moral cripple. Those who support him should examine their own morality, if they can.
Fantastic. the Minute the comments disappear, the true snide, hypocritical self appears. It's worse than cheating on a disabled wife, but not by much. you know, your moral, Catholic choice etc? You don't realise, but your comments might well have been the only thing keeping you in check - as it is, your hunger for influence and the lack of any feedback is going to ensure your irredeemable slide into hackery to the point of it being obvious to all, and so I welcome and delight in that. Pray for me.
|
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
"the only similarity between the footage in the ad and Triumph of the Will is the presence of German landmarks and German crowds, and thus that if liberals are silly enough to see overtones of Hitler they should blame the organizers of Obama's itinerary - rather than implying, as I think my phrasing seemed too, that there actually are overtones of Nuremberg in the footage."
This ignores the fact that Obama as Hitler is a common meme in the far-right blogosphere and media.
Posted by rickm | August 1, 2008 2:45 PM