More on the DailyKos hatespeech post
A good narrative on the follow up to the original dailykos post was at: http://berrysworld.blogspot.com/archives/2004_04_04_berrysworld_archive.html#108116036761252544
It turns out that there are layers and layers of direct and indirect hypocrisy here.
In addition to the non-apology apology, there is the non-report report where a friend or ideological soulmate of Dailykos intentionally downplays the 'hate' part of the hate post and then says, in effect, "why are people persecuting poor dailykos?"
How harmful is this? Well, it seems to me that the people harmed are the people who do the 'non report report' and the 'non apology apology', but maybe their readers are also affected. I'll have to think about this.
Sunday, April 04, 2004
John Dean vs. GWBush
At: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/04/04/wnix04.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/04/04/ixportaltop.html
John Dean, the former chief counsel (and convicted perjuror) to Richard Nixon blasted the Bush administration for being corrupt because (as I understand it) they won't let national security advisor Rice testify in public to the 9-11 commission. It seems the word 'corrupt' actually means 'secretive' but wait a minute, Rice is going to testify in public. So John Dean isn't being hypocritical just very, very sloppy and very, very behind the times and very, very hysterical.
Oddly, the actual hypocrit here is the President who, at first said that public testimony by Rice would badly damage the executive's ability to get honest advise, then said, 'oh well go ahead anyway.' Obviously either he didn't mean what he said when he won't let Rice testify or he didn't mean what he said when he did let Rice testify. In either case, however, this is a pretty inconsequential piece of hypocrisy and in fact, the President, is, I think, supposed to get huffy when he executive perogatives are challenged.
At: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/04/04/wnix04.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/04/04/ixportaltop.html
John Dean, the former chief counsel (and convicted perjuror) to Richard Nixon blasted the Bush administration for being corrupt because (as I understand it) they won't let national security advisor Rice testify in public to the 9-11 commission. It seems the word 'corrupt' actually means 'secretive' but wait a minute, Rice is going to testify in public. So John Dean isn't being hypocritical just very, very sloppy and very, very behind the times and very, very hysterical.
Oddly, the actual hypocrit here is the President who, at first said that public testimony by Rice would badly damage the executive's ability to get honest advise, then said, 'oh well go ahead anyway.' Obviously either he didn't mean what he said when he won't let Rice testify or he didn't mean what he said when he did let Rice testify. In either case, however, this is a pretty inconsequential piece of hypocrisy and in fact, the President, is, I think, supposed to get huffy when he executive perogatives are challenged.
Kerry and hip hop
Last week Kerry made some positive and cautionary comments about hip hop music. The theory is widespread that he actually knows nothing about the subject. This is more or less innocent pandering but its amusing none the less. A good read on this is at: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_04/003612.php
Last week Kerry made some positive and cautionary comments about hip hop music. The theory is widespread that he actually knows nothing about the subject. This is more or less innocent pandering but its amusing none the less. A good read on this is at: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_04/003612.php
The Daily Kos's manuvers
A few days ago dailykos (a popular left wing blogger - up to 3M hits/day) posted some thoughts about some civilian American causalties. He basically celebrated their death by mutilation deaths. Shortly thereafter, dailykos eliminated the post and had it eliminated from one of the google archives. Others, however, noticed. One of these was John Kerry who, up until that point was advertising on dailykos. Some of Kerry's fans posted anti-link elimination messages on Kerry's site.
Dailykos then posted a non apology apology and blamed others for illuminating his earlier post.
By doing this latter post he basically admitted that his removal of the earlier post did not mean that he disbelieved his own words. This is about as clear a slamdunk case of hypocrisy as you will ever see. Now, it turns out that this hypocrisy is not very important because those who are dailykos fans are not influenced by the fact that it was hypocrisy and neither are the anti dailykos people. Dailykos marginally loses some revenue from the Kerry campaign.
A good place to read the various ins and outs of this is at: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_04/003612.php
A few days ago dailykos (a popular left wing blogger - up to 3M hits/day) posted some thoughts about some civilian American causalties. He basically celebrated their death by mutilation deaths. Shortly thereafter, dailykos eliminated the post and had it eliminated from one of the google archives. Others, however, noticed. One of these was John Kerry who, up until that point was advertising on dailykos. Some of Kerry's fans posted anti-link elimination messages on Kerry's site.
Dailykos then posted a non apology apology and blamed others for illuminating his earlier post.
By doing this latter post he basically admitted that his removal of the earlier post did not mean that he disbelieved his own words. This is about as clear a slamdunk case of hypocrisy as you will ever see. Now, it turns out that this hypocrisy is not very important because those who are dailykos fans are not influenced by the fact that it was hypocrisy and neither are the anti dailykos people. Dailykos marginally loses some revenue from the Kerry campaign.
A good place to read the various ins and outs of this is at: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_04/003612.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)