ED linked to this earlier, but this Glenn Greenwald piece on the smearing of John Tyner by the Nation is worth a read.
There’s nothing I hate more than seeing people smeared for daring to speak up. It would be an exaggeration to compare this to the ballad of Graeme Frost, but it’s not that far off. The Nation should be ashamed, and it’s good to see that some staff members are.
pepesilvia
The outrage over this is absurd. Also here is the Ames and Levine response to GG:
http://exiledonline.com/mark-ames-and-yasha-levine-respond-to-glenn-greenwalds-strange-attack-on-their-tsa-article-in-the-nation/
Davebo
I was against civil liberties before I was for them.
Yet I’m not a right wing flip flopper. At least in my special world.
Joseph Nobles
Response from the authors:
They also apologized for the implications about Tyner.
DougJ
@Joseph Nobles:
Thanks.
EDIT: The article really sucks though. I’m not sympathetic to the authors.
pepesilvia
@Joseph Nobles:
I guess I can’t fault GG for not knowing the history of Ames/Levine, but to accuse them of being in the tank for the Democratic party was pretty laughable.
Joseph Nobles
@DougJ: You’re welcome. I just found it myself.
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
What is KVH’s role at The Nation? Does she read everything before it’s posted to the website? Does she just proof read the dead tree edition? Does she proof read both?
Tractarian
This is ridiculous. That article wasn’t a “smear job”, it was innuendo presented as….. innuendo.
Slowbama
It has been interesting watching the liberal blogosphere evolve its position on pat-downs over the past few days in response to the new meme that it’s “only” teabaggers who are against the TSA procedures. GOS, Maddow, and Matthews in particular decided, seemingly within a few hours of each other, that if the right wing is for the Fourth Amendment, they need to be agin’ it. I’ve seen a lot of that pop up here as well recently. It’s amazing how feckless, reactionary and bereft of core values many liberals are these days. They don’t deserve to be in charge of much, really.
DougJ
@Tractarian:
If they’d slipped the innuendo in halfway through, then fine, but they freaking led with it. That’s just wrong.
DougJ
@Slowbama:
I like to think this place is part of the liberal blogosphere.
E.D. Kain
@DougJ: Nor am I.
srv
So now there are teatards and CATO folk who aren’t Koch’s biotches? BJ getting all uppity now on this particular issue but happy to lump them in everywhere else.
I await the BJ high-Broderism coverage of Rand Paul’s coming assault on the TSA.
TooManyJens
@Slowbama:
[citation needed]
DougJ
@srv:
Tyner worked for CATO?
Paris
me too.
Morbo
We can still make fun of his pseudonym, right?
Darkrose
I thought the original article had a rather hysterical tone, but I also thought that Glenn was way over the top in accusing the Nation of being a Democratic Party house organ.
I’m very curious about whether or not Glenn’s going to admit that he may have overstated the case, or if he’s going to stick to his guns and insist that he’s 100% right, as he’s done in the past.
srv
@DougJ: He’ll be a CATO Fellow in no time.
I suggest a new term for these Obama sniping, teatard agreeing nuanced BJ’ers: Junktards.
cleek
@Slowbama:
wow. that’s some fucking awesome strawman army you’ve constructed there.
DougJ
@Darkrose:
I read the article again and it strikes me more and more as just ill-conceived. The evidence that this was a Koch-sponsored caper is weak.
cleek
hyperbolic spew
torrents of words cloud the light
Greenwald gushes forth
or whatever
Darkrose
@DougJ:
I agree. At the same time, I think it is worth raising the question of why, suddenly, the right is screaming about people touching their junk when it happens to a Nice White Guy–and why their solution is racial profiling. And I think that Glenn’s assertion that the Nation article is part of an insidious plot by the Democratic Party/Obama White House to shut down criticism is ludicrous. The Nation’s been pretty consistent and vocal about their disappointment with Obama; hardly fanpoodle behavior.
Joseph Nobles
@DougJ: You read the original article again? How about the one where they apologize for how they treated Tyner and defend the rest of the piece? The river has moved on.
ETA: For more information, Tyner’s own blog where he ably defends himself.
FlipYrWhig
@Darkrose: The Nation has always been the most negative and purist publication that covers American politics from the left. I’ve read them for about 15 years. And I believe that they have even included pieces by noted criticism-monger Glenn Greenwald. That guy is a dickweed of the first order. And, given his tendency to play guilt-by-association games and mind-read, it’s a bit rich for him to hold The Nation accountable for doing a standard Greenwald maneuver.
TooManyJens
@srv:
I swear to God, I have no idea what your point is on this thread.
me
It’s kind of annoying the way the Kochs, as crappy as they are, have become to be seen by some on the left like Soros is seen by Glenn Beck.
Elia
Is anyone else as sick of Greenwald freaking out and throwing as many hysterical, angry adjectives towards someone — who he almost invariably DOES NOT get in touch with before hitting “publish” — as he can before determining them to be, obviously, totalitarian propagandists?
Unless he’s taking on someone truly loathsome like Thiessen or Kristol or Goldberg, the guy is just unbearably sanctimonious and, yes, shrill.
w/r/t the piece in question: not impressive. I don’t read the Nation and this certainly hasn’t compelled me to rethink that decision…
eemom
@Darkrose:
Ya mean, even when GG has a simple, solid shot at calling out something wrong he’s gotta detonate his entire arsenal of Obama-bashing nukes for good measure?? Surely you jest.
ok……NOW, surely, you jest.
srv
@Darkrose: Yes, the right, libertarian and teatards are pretty all pro-profiling. Strip searching and fondling brown-folk’s junk is A-OK.
So the civil-liberties argument is 100% hypocrisy on their part.
DougJ
@Joseph Nobles:
I re-read the original article after reading their defense.
eemom
@Elia:
why no……the thought never crossed my mind.
Darkrose
@eemom: What can I say…I’m an eternal optimist.
Darkrose
@srv:
…Right. Because that’s totally what I said.
Would you care for some pie?
Slowbama
@TooManyJens: Oh, I get it. You waited for someone to write an opinion or observation, then asked for a link! Because only strictly factual information is allowed on a blog. Original!
FlipYrWhig
@Elia: A libertarian with a smug and superior attitude and delusions of grandeur? That’s unpossible!
Joseph Nobles
Here’s my take on the whole issue.
From 2001-2010, the left was exercised about the important issue of civil liberties at the airport check-ins. In 2010, the right decided to attack Obama and a near-unionized TSA by adopting the issue. It didn’t take until Tyner took his stand. The oxygen hit the flames, the whole country was up in arms, the children are being groped, the nudie pictures are being masturbated to, help us, Lord.
Fast-forward a few months when the right gets racial profiling in place at the gates. They and the oxygen will disappear, and then the left will spend another nine years being mad about these fresh new violations of civil liberties and wondering how they got played. Figuring that out will look a lot like the Nation article, minus the bogus attack on Tyner.
The new bipartisanship: figuring out how to exploit the issues of your political adversaries for your own advantage.
Mark S.
Jesus, I finally got around to reading that ACLU thing:
That was a 68-year-old woman. And they’re doing this shit to children? And our media dildo elites are telling us to suck it up and enjoy this molestation? Someone tell me this is all a dream.
General Stuck
@FlipYrWhig:
The only people in this mind numbing tempest that make any sense to me, are the wingnuts. They are easy to follow, whatever opportunity to make political points for regaining power, they take. No debate, no gray areas, and no concept of personal hypocrisy, they just grab the news cycle brass ring like rats punching the cocaine button in cage experiments.
The liberal left, that is a different story. They are just as inconsistent, but it’s a swirl of libertarian, anti Bush reaction, and unlikely to me, modesty about fuzzy xrays of their junk. (and I oppose the groping) While frantically hopping to one fact free meme to the next, in order to justify it. All the while, snuggling up closer and closer to the Randoids, and also too, the soulless and utterly unprincipled wingnuts.
And over something that is not required, flying. Now if the government started doing this for any public activity, that would be different. But jeevus, riding aboard an airplane at 30 thousand feet should have obvious ‘special case’ written all over it.
Somebody needs to study this phenomenon like they do with the Lions and Hyenas in Africa, to maybe give me a clue to what I’m witnessing. Or, maybe I’m just an aging hippie, where nekkedness doesn’t bother me like it should.
Geoduck
For those who are interested, you can find more of Ames and Levine’s work here:
http://exiledonline.com
TooManyJens
@Slowbama: So what you’re saying is, you’re willing to make accusations but not willing to back them up.
DougJ
@Geoduck:
This isn’t personal against the authors, it’s about the article. Everyone writes stuff that sucks sometimes.
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
@Joseph Nobles: And what will they racial profile? Any non-white? What most people are missing out on is that it is all security theater. Making connected people rich(shocker, I know!!).
FlipYrWhig
Greenwald is tenaciously committed to the idea that criticizing authority is a very, very, brave and risky thing, which is why he’s so proud of himself for doing it. It hasn’t really occurred to him that criticizing authority takes place in millions of venues and takes millions of forms. It’s not hard to do, not hard to come by, and can be done at no great cost. By all means, do it, but stop patting yourself on the fucking back, and stop basking in the reflected glory you think you get from other people who do it in ways you approve. Christ.
Diomedes
I have my strategy for tomorrow: before the search starts, the agent is supposed to ask if I have any sore areas. My answer? “Yes, my penis, testicles, nipples, and ass. [pause]. I just had sex before getting to the airport.”
Then, the instant the agent puts his hands on me, I’m going to half-close my eyes and start moaning in ecstasy, as if I’m just about to come, and I’m not going to stop moaning until it’s over (though I may throw in a few “oh, that’s it, don’t stop” under my breath). If it’s going to be uncomfortable for me, I’m going to make damn sure that it’s uncomfortable for the agent.
Diomedes
And over something that is not required, flying.
Please explain to me how I, living in NY, am supposed to visit my family in Hawaii without flying, or how they’re supposed to visit me.
FlipYrWhig
@General Stuck: I think you can be a principled civil libertarian who objects strongly to policies like this and sees them as belonging to a continuum that also includes warrantless wiretapping, national ID cards, etc. Fine, cool, knock yourself out, argue with people who feel differently, excellent. Make a lot of noise, make a lot of change. I just don’t find it to be so brave. At least Tyner went through the line and put himself in a position to be harassed, fined, whatever.
srv
@Darkrose: Well, it’s totally what Davebo said too, but maybe he was in moderation.
Like a ghost, he is. Haven’t seen him comment in a year.
eemom
@FlipYrWhig:
Sir. In greenwaldology, as in other topics, your analysis is unerringly spot-on.
Joseph Nobles
@Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle: Yes, it is all security theater. But instead of Granny Got Groped, it will be Fayed Got Fingered, a play much more to the liking of the right.
General Stuck
@FlipYrWhig:
I simply do not see this as a civil liberty issue. It is a safety issue for the special case of commercial aviation. I remember liberals, myself included hollering at Bush to implement more security measures here at home rather than invading foreign countries and shit.
The scanning either works or it doesn’t, and if people want to fly, then a very low level xray scan producing a manikin like image, that is personally unidentifiable is not an incursion into our civil liberties, imo, compared with warrantless eavesdropping and NSL’s and all the shit wrought by the Patriot Act.
FlipYrWhig
OK, I’ve read the article now. It is the case that the authors blur the distinction between the idea that Tyner is a libertarian provocateur and the much sketchier idea that Tyner is a bought-and-paid-for libertarian provocateur. They fucked that up.
To leap from there to saying that the authors are part of a cabal who enforces party orthodoxy is characteristic Greenwaldism. And now he, or someone who likes him more than I do, will say, “But he totally nailed that the authors were using innuendo against Tyner,” which is true, BUT it doesn’t help him make his larger case about conspiracies of silence and the audacity of (his own) dissent. Which is where he _always_ goes, because that way if you take exception to him you’re really just backing corporatocracy or the national-security state or something.
FlipYrWhig
@General Stuck: I dunno, IANAL but it seems germane to some core civil-liberties ideas like the right to privacy, the rules governing searches and seizures, and the standard of probable cause. It’s worth fighting about.
I honestly feel like the whole “security theater” thing is intended to cover the ass of the TSA, so that if something spectacularly atrocious does go down, they would be less open to being held liable or culpable. Kind of like the way doctors want to administer every possible test, so that if the patient dies they don’t get sued for malpractice on the basis of some stone left unturned.
General Stuck
I hate libertarian philosophy, in some ways more than conservative republican philosophy, but what I hate more than either of those things is a poseur who claims to speak for progressives, ie the center left who actually is a libertarian asshat. And those who accept being grifted as such, prolly ought to get a brain.
General Stuck
@FlipYrWhig:
Ha. Finally found something you and I completely disagree on. :)
Bnut
Jeremy Scahill is my man crush. Or hetero-life mate. Or a shoe. He’s fucking cool.
tomvox1
What is interesting is that Greenwald gets so exercised once “Koch-Funded Libertarians” is introduced into the mix. The article in question is quite sloppy but maybe Glenn ought to recuse himself from commenting on anything regarding Koch-funded Libertarians, since he has been one himself in the recent past.
PanAmerican
So…. in summary, white elites get bent out of shape when the state security apparatus gets pointed at them.
There’s a fucking shock.
The racial profiling here is that of the TSA workers. The expected power dynamic is being inverted and it is making some folks uncomfortable.
freelancer
@Bnut:
Seconded. This segment is as informative as it is depressing. It’s like watching Dr. Strangelove play out in front of your very eyes. Hilarious but dark.
Ailuridae
@PanAmerican:
Us versus them. When White Authoritarians realize the security state might invade their privacy they are enraged; when it is Ali, or Yousef or Leroy or Jose, they give a fucking shit.
Libertarians, right and left are broadly consistent on this stuff (their sole saving grace). But the right, broadly? This is a cudgel to prove the obvious efficacy of racial profiling. And the libertarians, and a lot of the left are being led aroung by their noses.
MikeJ
Can I just hate everybody involved?
Xenos
@me:
Indeed. Most of the Koch’s money is completely wasted producing junk political science that nobody reads. They are not brilliant fascistic masterminds, but a couple mediocre fascistic dullards with way too much money to waste on promoting dishonest trolls. And it is sloppy thinking and ‘vulgar marxism’ to see them as the source of every evil.
Unless they disavow the plainly racist strains of neo-bircherism, though, they need to be called out consistently about it. And since they remain private, that means calling out the pundits they fund and support. If the folks at Reason want to avoid the taint they can decline the money.
General Stuck
@MikeJ:
yes
BR
@PanAmerican:
This.
(And I say it despite thinking it’s all been security theater for a decade.)
PanAmerican
@Ailuridae:
Well, when you’ve got a workforce that’s 40% minority and 100% working class it’s best to let them know their place by the implication they are a bunch of perverts looking for a grope.
For those that are concerned, a bit of advice. Next time you fly, keep an eye on their crotches. You can spot the preverts by the dried semen stains on their pants.
Allan
You know, Glenn Greenwald really is shrill.
His world is divided into two kinds of people: corrupt authoritarian totalitarian immoral evil monsters who probably fantasize about raping children, and Glenn Greenwald.
Allan
@Diomedes: Since the poorly paid TSA agent you’re going to harrass tomorrow for your own entertainment can’t say it, allow me: fuck you.
ChrisNYC
I don’t think this is a civil liberties issue either.
If our civil liberties are to protect us from abuse of government power or from the abuse of the individual’s fundamental rights by a democratic majority, I would argue that the scan/pat down solution is wildly more preservative of civil liberties than either profiling (the right’s answer) or increased investigation and targeting of specific threats (the left’s answer). The scan/pat down happens in public and applies to everyone which is pretty much a recipe for preservation of civil liberties. Plus, if people are horrified by it, there are a ton of democratic remedies — which, in a representative democracy, is the power the populace retains — making it a campaign issue, organized boycotts of flying, public hearings on alternatives, sustained harassment of electeds. The only things those remedies require is time and some tenacity.
The government has way more opportunity to abuse either profiling or investigations of specific targets/collection of information/a completely airtight threat flag showing up on passports or visas. And we’ve actually had at least one “enemies list” episode in our history so we know that that is more than possible. Those out-of-the-public-eye procedures seem to me much more dangerous precisely because they require tremendous trust in the good faith of officials and will effect such a small and, so, powerless portion of the population, there is absolutely no democratic check. Those are the ones that sneak up on you.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
hey, where are all of glenn’s groupies who swarm this site the minute someone says anything critical about him?
chaseyourtail
I think Greenwald is smearing the people he claims smeared the TSA protest guy. So there. Oh, and Greenwald sucks!
FlipYrWhig
@ChrisNYC: See, I think it is a “civil liberties issue,” but I don’t think that “civil liberties issue” is a magical phrase meaning “100% bad.” Is it too intrusive? I dunno, maybe, I’ll listen to some people who care more about it argue about it and then decide how I feel.
For doctrinaire libertarians, it’s all a seamless garment, and anything that compromises civil liberties in any way is abhorrent and must not stand. I’m not there. For instance, I’ve never been too concerned about the prospect of a national ID card. Some people get super worked-up about that. Not me. But it’s still a “civil liberties issue,” in that it involves the limits of what an agent of the government can compel you to do.
FlipYrWhig
@Allan: This!
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
seriously, glenn has been doing this for a long time. Anyone who disagrees with glenn can’t simply have a difference of opinion, no they have to be part of a conspiracy with Rahm or The Stonecutters.
But he isn’t alone. Other lefty blogs are the same way. For example, when his Eminence, Dr. Paul Krugman supported the Cadillac Tax, they trashed him every which way you can.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
the outrage over the pat-downs is silly.
they can x-ray my luggage and open my carry-on.
I have to reveal the contents of my pockets if I trigger a metal detector.
Dogs can sniff my luggage, seeking drugs.
I have to present a valid, current I.D.
I have to answer a bunch of questions if I fit a problematic profile (ie paying cash for a one way cross country ticket with no luggage/returning from Columbia with 24 unsealed ‘coffee” cans).
I have to take off my nikes and expose my socks and take off my belt.
I can’t bring on any liquid containers above a maximum size.
that’s okay. that doesn’t violate the 4th.
Oh, but patting my butt goes to far!
chaseyourtail
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): And Cole and Scahill immediately (almost dutifully) jump on the bandwagon. I pray I don’t see the three of them sticking their tongues out at me when I close my eyes in bed tonight.
ChrisNYC
@FlipYrWhig: Not to belabor it and thanks for slogging through my long comment. I hear you on the doctrinaire stuff.
It’s weird because a national ID card does bother me. This is a bit far out but I sort of think people have a right to be where they are. Individuals don’t have a choice but to live in the nation-state system but retaining the choice of opting out of it whereever you want is important to me. I don’t mind that there is sacrifice associated with that choice, provided that the choice exists. Any kind of list that you have to be on for no other reason than that government wants to have a list seems upside down. And, the scurrilous abuse potential. Obviously, the TSA is separate because of the privilege v. right distinction. Saying you want a choice not on the menu (to fly without being scanned or patted down) doesn’t turn all acts of grudging or rageful consent into coercion.
Uncle Clarence Thomas
@FlipYrWhig:
.
.
Really, dickwart? If he’s of the first order, then surely you can easily give 25 specific examples to actually prove your assertion-offered-as-a-fact, rather than opening wide and blowing hard as per your usual strategy. We’re waiting…
Your romper room psychologizing is neither impressive nor physically possible. Instead of basing the vast majority of your Greenwald analysis on your mind-reading prowess, why don’t you rigorously stick to the facts? Oh yeah, right — because you’re a balloonbagger.
Oral sex is not required, monkey. The Constitution is. But feel free to ask to suck Greenwald’s dick. (After eemom is finished, of course.)
.
.
chaseyourtail
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): “Oh, but patting my butt goes to far!” Lol, you’d think that’s what’s happening with all the hysteria about it. Honestly, I feel sorry for the guy or gal who has to do the pat downs. Really, where’s the outrage on their behalf? They have to touch/”pat” icky people. Ew.
Yutsano
@FlipYrWhig: Methinks you got under someone’s skin. That’s quite the invective being thrown your direction. I’m rather proud I must say.
Martin Gifford
@Slowbama:
They need a strong leader who is consistent, ethical, and logical. Without that, they grope around in the dark for direction, lurching from side to side, and contradicting themselves endlessly. One moment they are full of hope, the next they are full of compromise and excuses.
It has been tragic watching them fail to deal with Obama’s change from the Saviour into the Jellyfish in Chief. As Obama sacrificed consistency, ethics, and logic, the liberals compromised their own principles.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Martin Gifford:
hahahahhahaahaahhahahhahahahah
The libertards are at war with Cole and BJ.
hahahahhahaahahhaahahahahhahaah
Joseph Nobles
@chaseyourtail: Yes, TSA agents have been getting a crash course in the hygiene habits of the average American. And most of them still manage to maintain a professional demeanor.
eemom
.
.
.
.
.
hmmm. nothing.
.
.
.
.
Nope. Still not seeing it.
Guess I never will understand The Troll Mind.
chaseyourtail
@Joseph Nobles: I salute them. People should be protesting the fact that the TSA workers don’t get paid nearly enough to do that kind of work. Where’s Greenwald’s outrage on that front? Oh, nevermind.
Yutsano
@eemom: The real swing and a miss there? The suggestion you would give oral pleasure to Glenn. Our dear sweet wonderful gay as a plaid rabbit Glenn. Stranger happenings have occurred however.
Dave
Fuck all y’all. What the fuck do you think it gets you to bust out a righteous “what Greenwald said” when this fucking Tyner guy isn’t the even the fucking subject of the fucking Nation article?
“Oh, this is a highly shameful smearing of an American citizen”
Fuck you. Where’s the smearing? Quote me some smearing of Tyner, please.
The Nation, which no one has ever heard of, suggests this dude “acted intentionally” and y’all are like “SUCH SUGGESTIONS WILL NOT STAND.” Fuck you. And fuck you for suggesting anyone gives a fuck about what gets published in The Nation.
eemom
@Yutsano:
not sure, but maybe Uncle Psycho meant to say Obama? Cuz even for him, the suggestion that I have any affection for Glenn, fellatial or otherwise, makes no sense whatever.
One of the stupidest trolls I’ve ever seen anywhere — and that is a most impressive distinction.
Yutsano
@eemom: Good of you to not mention it by name. I know now that the idiotic vertical ellipses mean instant ignore.
Martin Gifford
Ames and Levine’s original article and their response to Greenwald was full of ad hominem attacks and phony appeals to higher causes.
But as much as I like Greenwald, I have to say that he has one huge weakness as a writer. It is that he slides into extreme ad hominem attacks easily and often. It’s a pity because everything else about his work is great.
sukabi
@TooManyJens: Don’t know about Maddow, she’s been on vacation for the last couple of days so she hasn’t been on her show… she had a fill-in, the guy from the Nation that usually does it… but Matthews, Olbermann and Schultz have been beating the hell out of the idea that the “Opt out” was a total construction of the RW and dismissed any and all concerns about 4th amendment issues… their guests on the “left” all were beating the same drum… it was quite disturbing / dismaying… and most of it fact-free.
Suck It Up!
Suck It Up!
@Darkrose:
this is typical of Glenn. No surprise there. That accusation makes his point more credible to his readers.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@sukabi:
what 4th amendment issues? there are none.
Bill E Pilgrim
@DougJ:
Made me laugh with that one.
I think about half of your commenters (the ones who use the words “liberal” and “progressive” roughly the same way people at Red State do) would beg to differ.
John Bird
Mark Ames rules, anyway.
John Bird
I thank the Lord for Mark Ames, Matt Taibbi, and the eXile. Every fucking day. I kill a goat and two doves. I use the book as a mousepad.
John Bird
Everything that Balloon Juice is, is a pale, ghostly shadow of Mark Ames and his legacy, like the phantoms on the walls in Plato’s cave.
And don’t get me wrong, I like this site.
Ailuridae
@Bill E Pilgrim:
I think you’re a dumbass, As one of “those commenters” I can almost guarantee my politics are a klik left of yours. I just am not such a purist that I am willing to watch poor people continue to die. So, yeah. Fuck You.
Bill E Pilgrim
@Ailuridae: You’re one of the commenters who rails about how horrible liberals and progressives are? And you’re “to the left” of me?
One or the other of those claims is false.
If it’s the first one that’s false, then my comment wasn’t directed at you. And from my experience here, I sincerely doubt that anyone here is “to the left” of where I stand, so I suspect the second one is the one that’s false. Getting into a pissing match about who’s more lefty wasn’t the point however, at least not for me. It was simply pointing out that the liberal blogosphere isn’t generally full of people, like this thread at least, who are complaining about liberals and progressives all the time. That seems pretty obvious.
Keith G
A lot of baggage displayed on this thread.
Diomedes
Since the poorly paid TSA agent you’re going to harrass tomorrow for your own entertainment can’t say it, allow me: fuck you.
He’s the one harassing me — I’m not the one who’s going to be cupping his balls or running his hands up and down his inner thighs. If he touches my genitals, then that’s the response he’s going to get. What the fuck does the fact that he’s “poorly paid” (I bet he makes more than I do) have to do with it? Wrong is wrong, no matter how much or how little someone pays you to do it.
DougJ
@Dave:
Read the article again and I think you’ll see what I mean. Why lead with four grafs about the guy?
DougJ
@Bill E Pilgrim:
I rarely call people purity trolls but you are kind of being one here.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Diomedes:
can you say that slowly and with a deeper voice. that’s sounds fucking hawt!
Bill E Pilgrim
@DougJ: Well, I rarely call people’s claims bullshit, but that one is.
To be clear, my comment meant just what I said, a prod about some of your commenters, not you and John. i.e., “Well you may be in the liberal blogosphere, but I doubt whether some of your commenters think that they are!” I suspected that even you might have been amazed at some of the reactions here to your post, but I guess not.
I admit that “Half your commenters” was also more an expression of amazement about this particular thread than a literal estimate. But good lord.
Do you think “the liberal blogosphere” is filled with threads ranting about the horribleness of Glenn Greenwald any time his name is mentioned? Sure there’s disagreement and criticism but here it’s vilification, and it’s non-stop, furious, and predictable.
I like this blog about as much as any blog. More centrists than I’d like, but fewer truthers, so what the hell. I just thought this thread was rather astonishing. If you think Mike Kay likes being part of “the liberal blogosphere” you don’t see things as I do, that’s for sure.
IM
I think the main point of Greenwald stands. But as usual he goes to far and speculates to much about motive.
The defense of the authors is a bit weak, though. “Do you know my grandfather was in a GULAG” is not an argument.
Chyron HR
Of course when Glenn Greenwald or any other “real” liberals go on about how much they hate Balloon Juice, it just proves how un-liberal this site is. Funny how that works.
IM
But of course Grennwald never says he hates Balloon juice, rather the opposite.
And I don’t think the rest of the “liberal blogosphere” talks much about Balloon Juice.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Bill E Pilgrim:
That’s “Mike Kay – Democrat of the Century” to you bub.
Ah, the glen groupies are so thin skinned. he’s not even worth it, save yourself for some one who’s cute.
IM
save yourself for some one who’s cute.
like Jane Hamsher?
Citizen Alan
@Allan:
The fact that a low-level functionary of the police state is also an underpaid member of the proletariat who is just “following orders” does not change the fact that he is, you know, a low-level functionary of the police state. As I see it, we have two options: either seize every opportunity to shine a light on this (including, if necessary, faking orgasms during a pat down, which is something I’ve thought about myself), or accept the fact that within a few years it will be so common place that conservatives start agitating to use the nudie-scanners in schools to catch small children smuggling in Tylenol in violation of zero tolerance policies.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@IM: jane hamsher is gay? I didn’t know that. I’m gonna have to take my gaydar into the shop.
you know who is a cute gay libertarian – john stossel. I know some people don’t like the porn-stache. but he’s still cute. too bad he votes republican.
Bill E Pilgrim
@Chyron HR: Well, there are lots of possible responses to that but the main one that comes to mind is that I don’t know any liberal blogosphere site that vilifies Balloon Juice like this one does with Greenwald. Show me, if there is one.
Bill E Pilgrim
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): Who’s thin skinned? I figured you wouldn’t object to that characterization in the least, why would you see it as a slur?
So after hating on liberals and progressive and the liberal blogosphere all the time, are you saying that you are part of it?
Odie Hugh Manatee
@PanAmerican:
That’s why it’s getting ‘attention’ now. Poor white kids, old white grandma and such are being groped and scanned, that’s all. I think it’s great that these people are getting a taste of what it’s like to not be white. It’s all well and good when the not-white get harassed, ‘that’s just the cost of freedom’. Flying is an option, not a right. Don’t want to be scanned or groped? Don’t fly.
Tempest in a teapot. Literally.
Bill E Pilgrim
@IM: Agree on both counts.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Bill E Pilgrim:
oh please, glen and his groupies are so thin skinned they melt when someone turns on a flashlight.
And I can’t help it if you have the reading comprehension of sarah palin, but how dare you question the credentials of “the Democrat of the Century”.
IM
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century):
cute. I just reacted to cute.
IM
And the frontpagers here actually like Glenn (If not the Jane Hamshers of the left). It is a comment thing, this Glenn dislike.
Bill E Pilgrim
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): So “Democrat” is the same thing as “Liberal” and “Progressive” in your mind.
That actually explains a lot.
Bill E Pilgrim
@IM: That’s what I was saying in my comments here, including the first one.
IM
@Bill E Pilgrim:
Then I am running in open doors.
AhabTRuler
5@IM: And only about half of them, anyway.
Bill E Pilgrim
@IM: Be my guest. Just wanted to be sure that was clear.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bill E Pilgrim: I think the objections found on this site to “Liberals” and “Progressives” (capitals and quotation marks used intentionally) stem from disagreements about tactics and, even, style. The impression I get is that people on BJ tend to share the same goals and strategies, but fight over when it is okay to accept half a loaf and, sometimes whether it is half a loaf or even an loaf at all. I, myself, tend toward the incrementalist approach and can find myself frustrated by people not taking a good deal that is on the table in the hope of getting a better deal down the road. I am sure those people find me and people like me frustrating because of our tendency to take what they see as crappy deals when a better one is still out there. Still the same team. Greenwald hate stems from style. While he is often right on the issues, he piles thin-skinnedness on top of sanctimony and tends toward imputation of the worst motives to anyone with whom he disagrees. He is a polemicist and that just doesn’t float everyone’s boat.
Bill E Pilgrim
@Omnes Omnibus: I think that’s an entirely reasonable argument and I also think that it’s an entirely unreasonable characterization of what actually happened in the thread above you. In some cases. A bunch of them.
I mean, you have to recognize the difference between “I can find myself frustrated by people” and oh, say this one: @Dave:
And despite wild guesses from at least one here, I’m not a big Greenwald booster or fan, I like most of his stuff a lot, sometimes I agree with what you wrote about him, sometimes not. That’s not the point. The obsessive hatred of him here is just weird. Especially when, like other liberal blogosphere sites, the front pagers are often linking to him. I mean positively.
I feel like we’ve had this conversation before though, so that’s enough for now.
rootless_e
As usual, when the MSM says get angry, the netroots asks “how much spittle?”
Greenwald is a kind of cheerleader and marching band director for the 5minute hate. God knows, it’s natural to wonder why people who support strip searching black kids on the street and get excited by torture are indignant at the actions of an agency lead by the guy who refused to let FBI agents participate in Bush’s torture regime – so that needs to be slapped down.
Allan
@Citizen Alan: Don’t get in that line at the airport! You know what’s waiting for you on the other side of the screeners, don’t you? Auschwitz!
Allan
@Diomedes: And again, I say: fuck you. That one was from me.
When you act like a dick to these people who are trying to keep you from being scattered like ground round across a few square miles of Nebraska, do you think Janet Napolitano is instant-messaged: Janet, a passenger doesn’t like what we’re doing, and she will reply: immediately curtail all advanced screening nationwide?
Allan
The Greenwald beef here is with assholism.
Look, I’m an asshole. Cole said so, so it must be true.
And all I have to do to get him to call me an asshole is to respond to him using the exact same tone of moral scold about LGBT issues that Glenn uses about everything.
General Stuck
@Uncle Clarence Thomas:
Dude, you are rapidly going off whatever shaky rails you were on. jeebus, man, get ahold of yourself.
PanAmerican
Have we shoved the TSA’s origins story down the old memory hole?
As I recall, the Bush admin was against it, citing the usual GOP tropes about bureaucracy expansion and union workforces. Congressional Democrats and the prog-o-sphere went into a full-court poutrage to cynically win a news cycle and managed to roll the White House.
I guess the bully pulpit wasn’t working that week. Or maybe there’s a lesson to be learned about short term political expediency vs. long term systemic change.. or maybe.. aw fuck it. Who is up for primarying Obama?!!
Nick
@Slowbama:
Yeah I noticed that too, on this issue, the blogsphere is almost like a robot that got confused and is shorting out.
Nick
@Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle:
Yes. Until a white Chechnyan muslim woman blows a A320 out of the sky and the right goes “Nobody could’ve predicted”
Omnes Omnibus
@Bill E Pilgrim: Deceased equine flagellation doesn’t do it for for you? Fair enough. As an addendum to my earlier comment, I would also add: sometimes people here just act like assholes because they can.
General Stuck
@Omnes Omnibus:
You can fluff this whiny brat if you want, but please don’t make general motive characterizations for the rest of us.
Omnes Omnibus
@General Stuck: General, if the shoe fits…. Are you seriously going to say that assholery for its own sake does not happen here?
brantl
I think Glenn nailed it, myself. They treated this individual very poorly. Glenn didn’t bitch about the rest of their story, he bitched about the bitchworthy part. They can get over themselves. And MAYBE they were wrong about this guy? What a load of horseshit. They were plainly wrong about this guy.
General Stuck
@Omnes Omnibus:
We are talking specifically about Glenn Greenwald, and my opposition to his bullshit has been presented in detailed and cogent argument. General assholishness, at times, yes. On GG, absolutely not. At least not without making a serious argument, with facts and such. I agree he is a polemicist, and that I don’t particularly like that brand of politicking. but it is part of the political ecosystem. The problem is, that his acolytes seem to not recognize his method, and take what he writes as gospel fact. It is not.
edit – and the starting gate for that is “Obama worse than Bush”, unadulterated horseshit.
Just Some Fuckhead
Can we get a little love for the low paid apparatchiks that have to touch these people? Next time yer on an airplane, look around at the passengers. Would you want to touch them, feel them, rub their private parts? Ugh.
TooManyJens
@sukabi: I’m sorry to hear that about Mathews, Olbermann, and Schultz. Thank you for providing more information than Slowbama was willing to. The reason I asked is that I have been watching Maddow’s show this week, and Slowbama completely mischaracterized what was said there. So I was rather suspicious about his/her interpretations.
Allan
Re: the underappreciated TSA agents – Everyone has seen this, right? Happy Thanksgiving!
FlipYrWhig
@brantl: That’s not all Greenwald wrote, though. He didn’t just say The Nation article picked on Tyner (for instance, by not being clear about the difference between his libertarianism and desire to confront the system and get publicity for his cause, on the one hand, and the way the attitude of protest has been abetted and inflamed by the professional right). He had to go from there to say that The Nation magazine is part of a plot to silence dissent.
And that’s what he _habitually_ does, like when he says that the battle over the public option proves that Obama never wanted the public option at all, or his theory that the Democratic party has set up a rotation system of designated troublemakers so that there will always be someone to blame for important legislation not coming to pass. He always starts from something interesting and most often correct… and then uses it to build a whole edifice of, well, innuendo and sinister implications about who’s pulling the strings.
That’s why I find it particularly ironic for him to be up in arms about this piece, because it has many Greenwaldian hallmarks: the article’s basic premise is that the first protester (the one who invented her story) was a bought-and-paid-for activist, so some of the TSA protests have the look of an astroturf operation, so Tyner’s might as well. Well, The Nation article’s authors didn’t do enough to prove Tyner’s connection, and that’s where Greenwald pounced. But if you ever try to confront Greenwald with his own leaps and unproven contentions, which are _very similar_, he gets super pissy, and then his even pissier defenders swarm to protect him.
FlipYrWhig
@sukabi:
The Nation, you say? Didn’t I hear somewhere that that was a Democratic party house organ that cracks down on all dissenting views?
Just Some Fuckhead
@Allan: Yeah, just thinking about rubbing dirty and disgusting strangers makes me want to throw up right into the hairy skin pouch formed by my belly fold.
taylormattd
@Darkrose: The Nation made the unforgivable error of dissing people who call themselves libertarian. That is the only reason he gives to shits about the article. The guy has a crush on the racist Ron Paul.
Dave
@DougJ: Writing about a guy for four paragraphs does not constitute a shameful smear.
Citizen Alan
@Allan:
Well, the first step is admitting you have a problem. Now, if only you could acknowledge your other problems: the fact that you continually pee all over yourself at the (largely sensationalized) possibility of terrorist attacks and the fact that you are a closet fascist.
Allan
@Citizen Alan: Is that you, Glenn?
Citizen Alan
@Allan:
Don’t look know, Allan, BUT THERE’S A TERRORIST BEHIND THE COUCH!
Now, be honest. I just made you pee yourself, didn’t I.