Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

fuckem (in honor of the late great efgoldman)

If you are still in the GOP, you are an extremist.

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

All your base are belong to Tunch.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Today’s GOP: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

Prediction: the GOP will rethink its strategy of boycotting future committees.

You cannot shame the shameless.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

I’m pretty sure there’s only one Jack Smith.

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

The words do not have to be perfect.

Peak wingnut was a lie.

Republicans seem to think life begins at the candlelight dinner the night before.

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

It’s the corruption, stupid.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

And we’re all out of bubblegum.

Give the craziest people you know everything they want and hope they don’t ask for more? Great plan.

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

Everybody saw this coming.

You are here: Home / Meta

Reader Interactions

52Comments

  1. 1.

    Bombadil

    From Patterico:

    He is honest, smart, and plugged in — and he is definitely not part of the stuffy liberal old guard at the paper. (For example, he recently published a great book about John McCain which ridicules the myth that McCain is a straight-talking maverick.)

    Patterico thinks that it’s the “stuffy, liberal old guard” are the ones who think that “McCain is a straight-talking maverick”?

    WTF?

  2. 2.

    The Stranger

    …ummm…because one guy said he had not heard a rumor makes it not true?

    There are all kinds of logical fallacies there.

    Meanwhile, a Hitlery Clintoon supporter threatens to assasinate Tim Russert because he had the temerity to actually prod the Gorillary into actuallay answering questions….and nary a peep from the MSM

  3. 3.

    jcricket

    Rumors… Misty watered colored rumors… of the Clinton years…

    Republicans long for a Democratic scandal to distract from the ongoing tsunami of Republican scandal (how many more not-gay Republicans can resign or be caught in a prostitution or corruption scandal?). I can’t wait for St. Rudy to get fucking creamed by all the stuff that’s going to wipe that smug 9/11 sheen right off his bald head.

  4. 4.

    jcricket

    Wanted to add – Republicans better wrap their heads around the idea that the wave of scandal hasn’t even begun to break for them. If they get washed (ha) out of office in greater numbers in 2008 expect the investigations to re-double and the scandals to continue.

    I’m not just talking about the individual republican corruption/scandal (Stevens, Cunningham, Curtis (WA), Vitter) but also the coordinated (Foley) and the whole Bush administration stuff (Abramoff papers, politicization of the military, FDA/FEMA/NASA ruining, etc.). The fallout will continue for years, if the Dems are smart about how they play it.

  6. 6.

    Tim F.

    Given the number of divorces and extramarital trysts racked up on the ( R) side of this election, our Stranger friend had better hope that it’s just a rumor.

  7. 7.

    Bombadil

    Meanwhile, a Hitlery Clintoon supporter threatens to assasinate Tim Russert because he had the temerity to actually prod the Gorillary into actuallay answering questions….and nary a peep from the MSM

    Dude, if you have a link, post it, so we can all make fun of your goofy source.

  8. 8.

    28 Percent

    The Stranger, if that is his real name, is right. This does not prove that it is not true that a candidate has had an affair. If you could show it conclusively, then that would be something, but since you can not we can only use the Smell Test. Do you really believe that politicians do not have affairs? So naive! So many have affairs truly it is unreasonable to ask us to believe that rumors are not true even before anybody hears the rumors – where there is smoke there is often fire! Remember that whether it is a rumor or not does not matter because it could have been true before anybody suspected it was. Even your new hero Kucinich if that is his real name is not so perfect that he could not stray. Power is an aphrodisiac. Think about it with your HEADS!

  9. 9.

    Wilfred

    This reads like the old journalism angle that Roger Angell once wrote about. He said that back when covered the old Brooklyn Dodgers it was sometimes difficult to come up with stuff every day. So he’d go to the Dodger GM and say. “Hey what’s with this talk about trading Jackie Robinson/”. The GM would scream out that it was total bullshit, which it was as Angell had just made it up. That day’s story:

    Dodger GM denies Robinson trade rumors

    Same thing here; in fact, most blogscoops are exactly this.

  10. 10.

    scarshapedstar

    …ummm…because one guy said he had not heard a rumor makes it not true?

    There are all kinds of logical fallacies there.

    Uh, Stranger, aren’t you begging the question by assuming that the rumor even exists in the first place? Isn’t it quite possible that Ron Rosenbaum started a rumor that there was a rumored rumor about, oh let’s just get on with it, Hillary’s clam-wrestling proclivities?

    Hey, maybe next they’ll start a whisper campaign that “DC insiders” are all abuzz that there’s rumors of an alleged theory potentially tying Hillary to the possible murder of Vince Foster! And then I’ll stand between two mirrors and clwo my eyes out.

  13. 13.

    Ron Beasley

    This entire thing puzzles me. A well timed rumor can be even more effective than the truth – just ask John McCain. The problem is that this wasn’t well timed. It’s the sort of thing you float a few days before an election not a year before.

  14. 14.

    Tom Hilton

    The Stranger, if that is his real name, is right.

    I agree with this. If the name on that person’s birth certificate is in fact “The Stranger”, then he is in fact right. If it isn’t, then he is wrong.

    So many have affairs truly it is unreasonable to ask us to believe that rumors are not true even before anybody hears the rumors

    It would be irresponsible not to believe a rumor you haven’t even heard! In fact, it would be irresponsible to be skeptical of rumors you haven’t heard about people who haven’t even been born yet!

    …where there is smoke there is often fire!

    Tell it to John Kerry, dumbass.

  15. 15.

    Tsulagi

    Rumors that an editor was rumored to have heard rumors about a candidate appear to be just that- rumors.

    Yes, but of course that doesn’t prevent Patterico from saying “This doesn’t mean the rumor isn’t true,” Funny, he and the Allahpundit dismissively refer to the “old guard” at the LAT, while they got their National Enquirer thing on. Ah, the mind of a wingnut.

    Speaking of vapid wingnuts, Stranger, not so sure you’d want to get to the bottom of this rumor. Because if it pans out, typically it’s a Republican IN a bottom.

    But I defend cross-dressing Rudy’s right to be handcuffed by his old pal Kerik and pleasured any way he can imagine. And given the recent double wetsuited, dildoized Pub, obviously they REALLY got some imagination in their bottoms little heads whatever.

  18. 18.

    Heywood Jablomy

    Well put, Wilfred.

    Can you imagine how many times Patterico would be hysterically gurgitating the word LIAR is this sort of fecal matter had emerged from a lefty site?

    Check out for a minute the breathless credulity and childlike wish-it-were-trueism mixed with near-sexual-style anticipatory frenzy here

    http://lukeford.net/blog/?p=1031

    and here

    http://bookwormroom.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/wow-but-i-wonder-about-its-truth/

    and here

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=27763_The_Secret_Hillary&only

    They are truly, at the end of the day, children playing with toys they don’t comprehend, these Bushian asshats.

    In 100 years people will look back and go: “Oh yes, the era when the Children of the Corn ran the nation. That was a bad time.”

  20. 20.

    Zifnab

    HOO DID JOHN EDWARDZ SLEEP WIF?

    I don’t know, but if he wasn’t wearing a wet suit with a twelve inch condom-wrapped dildo up his rear, he’s going to be in for one hell of a scandal.

  22. 22.

    jcricket

    I don’t know, but if he wasn’t wearing a wet suit with a twelve inch condom-wrapped dildo up his rear

    The threshold is now at least two wet suits. If you’re wearing only one you won’t even get mentioned. And two is really just a copy-cat.

  23. 23.

    chopper

    This does not prove that it is not true that a candidate has had an affair.

    indeed, it does not prove a negative. in other news, it also doesn’t prove that said candidate has stopped beating his wife.

    where there is smoke there is often fire!

    and 50 million elvis fans can’t be wrong.

  26. 26.

    Dreggas

    There shall in that time be rumors of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things with the sort of raffia-work base, that has an attachment. At that time, a friend shall lose his friend’s hammer, and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight O’clock.

  28. 28.

    Fwiffo

    Well, it’s obviously a Republican. The paranoid rightly blogs think it’s not getting reported because the MSM is protecting a Democrat. Vince Foster proves that they would do no such thing.

    The reason it’s not getting reported is simply because a Republican involved in some kinky sex scandal is simply not news. It’s the classic Dog Bites Man story. I mean, it’s like having a newspaper report that they ran a print run that morning.

  29. 29.

    Patterico

    Yes, but of course that doesn’t prevent Patterico from saying “This doesn’t mean the rumor isn’t true,

    Uh, because it doesn’t? Even Matt Welch said that in a follow-up comment at my site. As some here have pointed out, his statement doesn’t constitute proof that the paper doesn’t have such a story.

    But that’s the way to bet, as I said at Hot Air. That’s the part left out by the person quoted above, who tried to suggest I was trying to keep the rumor alive. The whole point of my post was to question the veracity of the rumor, without overstating the case.

  31. 31.

    demimondian

    I hate to defend Patterico, but, folks, if you read his Hot Air posting and strip out the posturing self-righteousness about LA Times editors and trustworthiness — which is to say, most of the piece — he does eventually get around to genuinely suggesting the rumor probably isn’t true.

  32. 32.

    Uncle Kvetch

    Unless somebody can provide me with proof (and it better be good proof–I know all about kerning, yo!) that Patterico doesn’t sneak out of the house every night to engage in graphic sexual acts with stray dogs, while 28 Percenter and the Stray Dog watch and take pictures, I think it’s only common sense to assume that he does.

    And I’m still waiting for that definitive refutation of the Mickey Kaus goatblowing story. Until I get it, I’ll just have to assume that every once in awhile Patterico breaks his usual pattern and joins the Mickster down at the Petting Zoo for some clean, all-American fun.

  33. 33.

    Heywood Jablomy

    I agree with Demi – she nails Patterico’s trademarked oleo of “they do this all the time and it wouldn’t surprise me or be out of malevolent character” dry-ice steam release (must. please. masses.) with his deeply-embedded-in-the-fulmination safety-line acknowledgment that (i paraphrase) “the much-wished-for rumor may well not be as true as it surely sounds” (must. cover. ass.). Patterico loves to deploy the word lie and foundationally comprehends how to do so himself without doing so.

  34. 34.

    Patterico

    Let’s recap.

    I go find the best evidence available to date in the blogosphere shooting down the rumor. I post it on the highest-trafficked blog where I have posting privileges. But, because I don’t overstate the case for the debunking, the logical conclusion is that I am trying to push the rumor and keep it alive.

    OK, just checking.

  35. 35.

    Dug Jay

    Note to Patterico for future reference

    : you have to understand that at this site only the grey haze of a mindless received “liberalism” is acceptable, in other words…at this site, the world as described in yesterday’s Daily Kos postings, half-digested and regurgitated, never questioned or even analyzed, is acceptable as if it were the permanent religious text of some strange new orthodoxy.

  36. 36.

    Tsulagi

    Let’s recap.
    I go find the best evidence available to date in the blogosphere shooting down the rumor.

    Yeah, let’s recap. You post about a post about a post from a dweeb who writes “everyone knows” in the “elite” D.C. political reporting MSM about an explosive sexual scandal involving a candidate. The L.A. Times is sitting on the story. Of course the dweeb lets his readership know he runs in those elite circles so they can be suitably awed. Precious.

    Of course the really smart flip-flopping Allahpundit does the math. Conclusion: It’s a Republican; No it must be a Democrat!

    Back to the recapping, what would be the net effect after these posts about posts about posts rumoring the L.A. Times is sitting on a story? Which of course to most nutters means it must be a Democrat? Let’s ask a wingnut on the beat…

    The Stranger Says:

    …ummm…because one guy said he had not heard a rumor makes it not true?

    There are all kinds of logical fallacies there.

    Mission Accomplished! Yep, the L.A. Times is hiding a Democrat! Known truth. That the rumor has not been confirmed yet merely proves their duplicity. Everyone knows.

    And these guys just know everyone should see them as serious adults. LOL. If wingnuts didn’t exist, you would have to invent them for the comedy.

  37. 37.

    John Cole

    Maybe I am not paranoid enough, but my take on the post was that we can rule out that everyone knows about the rumor, but we can’t rule out that there is a rumor. However, given that we can rule out that everyone knows about the rumor, more than likely there is no there, there.

  38. 38.

    Tsulagi

    Ah, your logic is inescapable. But don’t forget, there is a set that does know so there may yet be some there there. Unless of course there isn’t any there there. Look forward to more nutter posts in search of there.

  39. 39.

    scarshapedstar

    I hate to defend Patterico, but, folks, if you read his Hot Air posting and strip out the posturing self-righteousness about LA Times editors and trustworthiness—which is to say, most of the piece—he does eventually get around to genuinely suggesting the rumor probably isn’t true.

    Folks, I hate to defend Hitler, but if you take away all the stuff about killing the Jews…

    …I kid, I kid. Seriously, though, I think the problem is that all the posturing self-rightousness leads me to believe that his suggestion isn’t really as genuine as you think. I’d describe it as more of a hedge.

  41. 41.

    Heywood Jablomy

    Well, if an aggressive journalism critic really felt after serious reporting that a vicious political rumor was so lame and ephemeral as to be unworthy of a “bet,” and in need of “shooting down,” would he then think it was a good idea to chum and blooden his most rabid partisans with a post such as this:

    I was on “Captain Ed” Morrissey’s BlogTalkRadio this afternoon, with Rick Moran of Right Wing Nuthouse. We discussed the Great Unpublished Election Sex Scandal …

    LINK:

    http://patterico.com/2007/11/01/patterico-on-captain-eds-radio-show/

    just asking …

  42. 42.

    Patterico

    I’m thinking you wouldn’t recognize irony if someone shoved it down your throat with both arms. Why do you think I used capital letters?

    If you listen to the show you can tell that I am skeptical.

    Maybe you geniuses could answer one question for me, just to satisfy my curiosity. Since I’m trying to puff up the rumor and substantiate it, according to you — then why, exactly, did I do a post that tends to dispel the rumor?

    IT MUST BE REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY!!!!1!!1!!

  43. 43.

    Tsulagi

    Oh, I’m sorry, I may have unintentionally offended. You actually thought people took the original Rosenbaum story and subsequent speculating posts seriously. That they had weight and substance. My apologies.

    To make it up so hopefully you feel better, do you know if there is any rumor out there that Brittney is now dating? What say your sources. Are they prepared to go on record confirming or denying? Has Allahpundit done the math yet? Really, we all want to know.

  44. 44.

    Heywood Jablomy

    Irony is easy to recognize, although the thought of Patterico’s pallid, hairy arms getting near one’s throat is less ironic than just full-on grotty.

    But even easier to spot is a GIANT BULLSHIT ARTIST playing slick by pretending to dispel a rumor worth less than a fart with a “post that tends to dispel the rumor.” Cute that — “tends” — a man who prizes himself for non-forked-tonguedness using dishonest and slimy tactics to further embed a rumor in the rightwing cultisphere via links and streaming chitchat when a simple “I would rather not risk propagating this tendentious b.s. by giving it serious weight” would do. That would be called taking a stand on principle.

    We watched you pull this stunt during the Jamal Hussein fiasco, so we’re familiar with the scam. At least when Malkin does it, she doesn’t try to lawyer her way around the “Fly my pretties, fly!” part. Please try to do better, Patterico, your schtick is getting worn.

  46. 46.

    The Other Steve

    My God, you people are idiots.

    Thank you.

    I’ve been telling them that for days, and they just won’t listen to me. Hopefully having someone of your find upstanding intellect and moral character call them idiots will finally get the point across.

  47. 47.

    Heywood Jablomy

    Patterico Says:
    My God, you people are idiots.

    November 1st, 2007 at 11:06 pm

    And there we have our principled stand.

  49. 49.

    Anne Laurie

    GCM: I vote we go with the National Enquirer’s oft-repeated story that Laura Bush has abandoned her sham marriage because Dubya has become infatuated with Condi Rice. Even though Condi assures Laura that Ms. Rice would never jeopardize her long-term relationship with a certain female news anchor…

    Although I’m sure the earlier commenters have already explained the real meaning of this imaginary rumor: With so many Repub skeletons tumbling out of the closets and into the News of the Weird columns, our Reichtard brethren are convinced that somehow, somewhere, the Democrats are getting away with… something. The parameters of that ‘something’ matter less than their burning resentment.

  50. 50.

    Bombadil

    Grumpy Code Monkey Says:

    What rumor?!

    Do you mean the rumor? Or the rumor that there’s a rumor? Or the rumor about the rumor that there’s a rumor? Or the rumor that the LA Times is sitting on a story about a rumor that there’s a rumor about the rumor?

    Please be more specific in your question.

  51. 51.

    Grumpy Code Monkey

    Do you mean the rumor? Or the rumor that there’s a rumor? Or the rumor about the rumor that there’s a rumor? Or the rumor that the LA Times is sitting on a story about a rumor that there’s a rumor about the rumor?

    That’s a cruel thing to do to a man on a Friday.

Comments are closed.