In response to this latest expose from Jaytea (which gets everything wrong as usual and manages to compare me to Brutus conspiring to murder Caesar!), I present this ’90s classic.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Inside Blogball Amusement
December 14th, 2007
29 Comments
If I got “everything” wrong, then you shouldn’t be too hard-pressed to cite examples…
I almost did make a mistake. I’d written that you’d chastised the Clinton campaign over the two volunteers passing the Obama-as-secret-Muslim rumor and was about to call you a hypocrite, but went back and saw instead you’d said nothing specific about it. That’s when I rewrote the hypocrisy paragraph and made it instead into the “honest politician” theme.
And for the record, I quoted the Shakespeare bit not for the magnitude of the offense, but for the amazingly well-crafted way The Bard kept repeating about Brutus’ honor, while saying between the lines that he was an utter scumbag. That, also, sprung from my last-minute correction.
I’m glad I was initially wrong, and caught it before I published. It made the piece that much better.
J.
“But then, my employer doesn’t support my blogging. In fact, they’ve recently updated the rules specifically forbidding blogging on company time.”
This is fucking bullshit. You attack OW’s posts over and over again based on when and where if posts them, not the substance in those posts.
That’s part of the reason I call you sub-human.
Jay Tea: “but it’s obvious he has a major hard-on for Mormons — of his 11 videos, five are slams on Mormons and Mormonism”
By similar analysis of your postings here, clearly its fair to say you have a hard-on for Oliver.
Jay Tea: “He didn’t have anything to say about the two volunteers sacked for passing along rumors that Obama is a secret Muslim.”
Just so I understand, Oliver has to comment on absolutely everything that happens? Because if he doesn’t post on some particular little bit of news he’s… what?
Jay Tea: “… if you just pass along rumors (even those so thoroughly debunked as the “Obama the secret Muslim” load of tripe)”
OK, now I’m really confused. Didn’t you just complain about Oliver not saying anything about this, and now you’re complaining he passed along the rumor?
Jay Tea: “But then, my employer doesn’t support my blogging. In fact, they’ve recently updated the rules specifically forbidding blogging on company time.”
And yet, here you are.
Yup, Sean, I posted that — on my lunch break, on my laptop. Now I’m at home — left early to make up for staying late earlier in the week.
Oh, and “rumor” means “unsubstantiated.” I looked through Oliver’s “Hillary Clinton” archives and other postings of the last two weeks, and found no mention of the two Hillary volunteers. If he did mention them, then I missed it — I will correct my piece and will apologize.
Sean, I meant the person who posted the video, not Oliver — that’s why I referred to the “5 of 11 videos.” I think Oliver is fairly ecumenical in his opinions. He’s not a religious bigot, he’s a partisan bigot. And not a very thoughtful one — Harry Reid, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader, is also a Mormon, like Romney.
Strowbridge, I occasionally toss in the “question the timing” on Oliver’s stuff as an afterthought, but I don’t recall it ever being the main point.
And I stand by the crux of my piece — Oliver is cheerfully passing along defamatory material without expending the slightest effort to verify that it’s accurate first — much like the Hillary Clinton volunteers who helped spread the “Obama is a secret Muslim” e-mails.
For the record, I dunno if the cartoon that has Oliver so enamored is an accurate depiction of Mormon theology or not — but I’m not about to take Oliver’s word for it. Especially when he says up front that he doesn’t know if it’s accurate or not.
But then, I’m not the one pushing it out so much.
J.
Jay Tea, you seem to be missing my points as your responses are not to the points I made.
- I never said you were referring to Oliver as the original poster of the video. I was making a point that what you said about that original poster and what could also be said about you. Please don’t correct me on things I haven’t said.
- I wasn’t claiming you had mis-reported whether Oliver had or had not mentioned the two Clinton volunteers. I was asking why it was necessary for him to blog on absolutely everything that happens. Please don’t suggest I’ve made accusations that I haven’t made.
- postings by JT in the last work week:
December 12, 2007 6:05 AM (Obama And New Hampshire)
December 12, 2007 6:13 AM (Jeanne Assam)
December 12, 2007 6:32 PM (Too Far)
December 12, 2007 8:31 PM (Too Far)
December 13, 2007 4:51 AM (Too Far)
December 14, 2007 1:42 PM (”on my lunch break”)
December 14, 2007 3:32 PM (”at home”)
Yup. Certainly looks to be outside work hours (depending on your time zone), although (until you explained) I think it understandable how the two postings on this thread today looked like they were done during work time.
I have to conclude that JAyTEa has an obvious hard on for you Oliver Willis. Beware.
He has a long rant about you posting the “anti-mormon” cartoon, but fails to post anything factual to rebut it, either on your original site, or on his during his rant. Judging from his chosen OW quotation, I get the feeling he is accusing you of being dishonest because you were too lazy to do the fact checking. How ironic, because, apparently, he too is too lazy to do any actual fact checking.
Classic:
“I guess just repeating stuff you hear or see isn’t such a big deal. Whether or not it’s true, if you just pass along rumors (even those so thoroughly debunked as the “Obama the secret Muslim” load of tripe), you’re immune from any culpability.”
There was a recent post about Democratic “Plants” versus the actual bias of the “outrage” question at the Republican YOUTUBE debate where JayTea pulled out the talking point encyclopedia and spewed so much it was funny. Including the following:
CNN enabled Saddam Hussein.
CNN was responsible for Hussein’s atrocities
Odd comparisons to FOX sponsored debates that never happened.
Cites to an Eason Jordan column that he obviously never read.
Unsubstantiated Statistics – 1/4 of CNN questions were from plants.
Oh, accusing CNN of pushing the OBAMA is a secret MOOSLIM story by providing a link showing them doing actual fact checking that the Washington Post failed to do, but not showing any actual story that CNN ran.
Classic JayTea. Spin, talking points, and fake statistics all over the place. Claims of mass bias, where he never bothered to explain how the offending question was biased in content. False analogies, etc. Get real.
Sean, I don’t work exactly conventional hours, but I do tend to wake up and start blogging around 4:00 a.m. EST. If I’m lucky, I get one piece ready for 5:00, and two others “in the can” to publish at 11:00 and 2:00 before I leave for work between 6:30 and 7:00. If I get time and inspiration in the evening, after work, I’ll pre-write my morning piece then. That’s why you’ll notice I almost never do “breaking news” stuff — I’m usually AFK when they break.
You’re right, though, about today — it’s my “not exactly conventional hours” at play.
Midder, I don’t recall saying that CNN was “responsible” for Saddam’s atrocities. But it’s indisputable — Eason’s own words confirm it — that CNN had considerable knowledge of Saddam’s atrocities, and covered them up for him. And almost a full quarter of the questioners at the GOP CNN/YouTube debate are extremely unlikely to vote in a Republican primary — those that aren’t staffers for Democrats had already announced their support for various Democrats.
And that story on Obama the secret Muslim? As soon as they knew that Spencer wasn’t going to give them what they wanted — to say that he bought into the story — they went away to find someone else who’d say it for them. His refutation ended up on the cutting room floor.
I have a “hard-on” for people who use religious bigotry and use highly-questionable material for defamatory purposes. Oliver out-and-out said that he had no idea about the accuracy of the cartoon, but posted it anyway in hopes it’d hurt Mitt Romney (and, by extension, all Mormons — including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Caesar’s Palace). I ignored it at first, but when Hot Air linked to his cross-posting it at AlterNet, I saw he was going to greater efforts to push that cartoon (still not caring to even find out who made it, and what it used for source material), I decided it needed a bit stronger response than a simple comment.
I give Oliver credit for several things, though. He’s never censored me here, he’s never grossly exploited his power as blogmaster here, and I’ve linked to him positively on at least a couple of occasions.
He and I seem to have similar principles towards commenters: a tolerance for pretty much “anything goes” until certain ethical lines are crossed, and no exploiting the power and access to information the blog host has over commenters. Occasionally I find myself wishing that he’d clamp down a smidgen on those who get a bit too venomous towards me, but then I remember how tempting it is to cut a bit more slack of those who agree with me and crack down on those who disagree — it’s a failing I often have, too.
For the record: I have more than my share of disagreements with Oliver, and occasionally come over here expecting to get into heated arguments and take some hefty abuse. But I also know that I’ll get equal treatment with the other commenters, as well as valuable practice in taking on opposing views. There are plenty of other sites I could go to, but as someone who’s rather proud of having been banned from Democratic Underground three times, I only go places where I might have a chance of a fair shake. And Oliver — for everything else I say about him — offers that, and for that I respect him.
I just probably don’t show that enough…
J.
Let’s see here. So much crap, so little time.
Oliver apparently doesn’t know the origin of the cartoon, and doesn’t care.
Obviously, you don’t either, since you never bother to do any research on the cartoon either.
Much like the old saw about polticians, Oliver’s honest — once he’s bought, he stays bought.
As opposed to you, who shills for free?
It’s funny hearing about you defending Mitt from (fake, mind you) accusation of his religion being a “cult”, when you and the rest of the conservative trolls here have called Haruhi-ism a fake religion. How elitist of you.
And I’m sure Oliver will agree with me on one thing: as much as supportive commenters are appreciated, it’s the dissenters that tend to get the most interesting and involved discussions going… and inspire the most entertaining conversations. It’s partly why I’m so slow on the ban-hammer over at Wizbang, and probably a factor in why Oliver tolerates commenters like me and that other Jay.
J.
Oliver Willis: “I don’t know enough about Mormon theology to know if this bit of propaganda is accurate or not (I know more about the people and the movement than what they worship) but it’s clear distinction from mainstream Christianity and the fact that it’s got over 500,000 views on Youtube can’t help someone like Mitt Romney.
Jay Tea: “Oliver out-and-out said that he had no idea about the accuracy of the cartoon, but posted it anyway in hopes it’d hurt Mitt Romney (and, by extension, all Mormons — including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Caesar’s Palace)”
From what in Oliver’s post do you draw the conclusion that his motive for posting it was to hurt Romney. My reading of it was that he’s making an observation. To wit: This cartoon getting a wide audience can’t benefit Romney.
What if he’d posted a link to the Fox News reports about Obama attending a Madrassa and said “I don’t know enough about Muslim teachings to know if this bit of propaganda is accurate or not (I know more about the people and the movement than what they worship) but it’s clear distinction from mainstream Public Education and the fact that it’s got over 500,000 views on Youtube can’t help someone like Obama.”?
Would you assume he’d posted it to specifically hurt not just Obama but also apparently ALL Muslims?
You raise a valid point, Sean — Romney is the most prominent Mormon right now, and anything that drives down the reputation of Mormons is most likely to hurt him more than anyone else. But the comparison fails when you consider that there are several other very prominent public figures who are also Mormons — like Harry Reid. The only really comparable figure if you substitute “Muslim” for “Mormon” is Keith Ellison — and he’s not only freshly-elected for a six-year term, his an actual Muslim and not just the subject of scurrilous rumors.
But the crux of my point remains: Oliver can’t vouch for the veracity of the cartoon, can’t comment on its accuracy, can’t even tell us who created it, but still thinks it deserves even further dissemination. Couple that with his openly-avowed partisanship and history of going after Romney, and the conclusion is fairly clear: its ability to hurt Romney’s campaign trumps all other considerations.
J.
Jay Tea, I disagree. Seems to me you have a conclusion (Oliver’s posting was made specifically to hurt Romney) and then find the facts to support it. Even going so far as to cavalierly dismiss “all other considerations”.
Mr. Tea wrote:
I guess just repeating stuff you hear or see isn’t such a big deal. Whether or not it’s true, if you just pass along rumors…you’re immune from any culpability.
I wish I could live with those kinds of rules. It’d make my blogging a bit easier.
Somebody call the repair shop. My irony meter is smokin’ again.
Tea, who was it who posted this just the other day?
I can hear John Edwards now: “Senator Clinton, you’re going to get asked about how your Rose Law Firm billing records were hidden, undiscovered, in your residence for years after they were subpoenaed. Or about your willingness to tolerate your husband’s infidelities. Or your truly astonishing single adventure in the cattle futures market. Or any of a host of other issues. Don’t you think you should either come clean on all these things, right now, and put them all to rest, or get out of the race before they can be used to bring down not only you, but our party?”
That’s beyond “passing along rumors.” That’s outright M.S.U. Take your fake, phony outrage and clear off.
it’s the dissenters that tend to get the most interesting and involved discussions going… and inspire the most entertaining conversations.
Yeah, in the way a car crash is interesting and involving.
Oliver can’t vouch for the veracity of the cartoon, can’t comment on its accuracy, can’t even tell us who created it
Neither can you apparently.
Oliver can’t vouch for the veracity of the cartoon, can’t comment on its accuracy, can’t even tell us who created it
Neither can you apparently.
And I still don’t see why anyone should have to in this context. Oliver didn’t hide that he couldn’t vouch for it. And, seems to me, his posting’s main point was that this cartoon being viewed by half a million people can’t be good for Romney.
Whether cartoon is accurate or not, whether someone can vouch for its veracity or not, what has that to do with the observation that having it widely viewed can’t be good for a Mormon candidate?
Ach. Goofed the tags again.
“Neither can you apparently.” is Zython’s comment. Should have been in italics.
“Strowbridge, I occasionally toss in the “question the timing” on Oliver’s stuff as an afterthought, but I don’t recall it ever being the main point.”
What you recall mean exactly shit.
And to call your desire to connect anything posted here to Media Matters as an, ‘afterthought’ is dishonest. Firstly, that seems to be a key attack you’ve brought up on numerous occasions. Secondly, it implies you’re capable of thinking.
Strowbridge, there’s an old saying that it takes two people to have a serious discussion.
Since you don’t consider me a human being, that means that you and I are incapable of having a serious discussion.
So I say this, as one sub-human to another: go fuck yourself.
With a chainsaw.
Repeatedly.
If you ever feel like having an actual discussion, let me know. In the meantime, fire up the Husqvarna and have a grand time.
J.
Sean, the statement about the cartoon is one thing. To publish it and make sure that even more people see it is another — especially when the author openly admits that he has no idea how accurate it is, and doesn’t care — is smear politics. To deny it is to be disingenuous in the extreme.
J.
I am so amused by this high-horsery. Is there anyone out there who actually believes it? I wonder where these moral betters have been since 1992?
Let’s try one more time.
Jay, it seems that the one who doesn’t care about the origins of the cartoon is you. Not only do you not mention them, but you also fail to acknowledge that you don’t know. Why do you hate Mormons? Why do you hate Haruhi-ism? Why do you hate America?
“Strowbridge, there’s an old saying that it takes two people to have a serious discussion.”
And you are not capable of one, which is why I treat you the way I do.
“If you ever feel like having an actual discussion, let me know.”
I tried having a serious discuss with you in the past. It didn’t work.
I actually defended you in the past to others in this Blog because I thought you were better than the rest of the right-wing ‘tards we get around here. You proved me wrong.
So listen to this next part carefully…
You are not the innocent victim here. You receive exactly the treatment you deserve. Don’t like it? Try and act human next time.
Funny, Strow, I don’t recall any attempts by you to have a serious discussion. I don’t recall any discussions at all, for that matter, that didn’t involve you descending into the gutter to slam me.
Not that I’m complaining. It’s actually helpful to me — I call it my AEWI, or Asshole Early Warning Detector. Once the abuse starts flying, I just know I needn’t bother take the person seriously.
Hell, sometimes I take it as a matter of pride that I’ve got them so worked up, they can’t even maintain coherency and actually rebut my points.
So sorry, no victim here. In fact, I’m feeling downright benevolent. Can I offer you some chain oil for that chainsaw? It’ll help it run smoother.
J.
“Funny, Strow, I don’t recall any attempts by you to have a serious discussion. I don’t recall any discussions at all, for that matter, that didn’t involve you descending into the gutter to slam me.”
That’s cause you never bother to participate into these.
“Hell, sometimes I take it as a matter of pride that I’ve got them so worked up, they can’t even maintain coherency and actually rebut my points.”
What fucking points?
“Hell, sometimes I take it as a matter of pride that I’ve got them so worked up,”
So you admit to being a troll. Very good.
“So sorry, no victim here.”
Yes you are. You are a victim of genetics and upbringing.
Funny, Strow, I don’t recall any attempts by you to have a serious discussion. I don’t recall any discussions at all, for that matter, that didn’t involve you descending into the gutter to slam me.
Yeah, well, Alzheimer’s will do that.
C.S.’s point is proven further by the fact that you continue to run away from my points. Three times I’ve tried to get a response fro you, and three times you’ve ignored me. Is it that you think you’re better than me, or is it more likely the fact that you can’t admit that I’ve outwitted you?
Sorry, Zython, kinda missed your comments. Lemme give ‘em a quick read…
1) I haven’t looked into the origins of the cartoon, either. Well, in my defense, I’ll say that I’m not saying anything about it at all, because I simply don’t have any info to judge upon. Oliver, from the same position of ignorance, decided to disseminate it further.
I also looked at the YouTube poster’s other videos, and almost half of them are anti-Mormon. So the guy has an agenda. That doesn’t make him wrong, but it doesn’t help him, either.
2) Yeah, I shill for free. I offer my opinions on whatever strikes me, whenever it strikes me, however it strikes me. I’m an utter free agent, obliged to no one. My agenda is simple: to say what I think. And I always try to not just say what I think, but why and what led me to that position. It’s a lasting effect of my education, particularly in math, where “show your work” was pounded into my skull.
Also, I make absolutely no pretenses at any kind of expert status. I never say “take my word for this, I’m a professional/I have a degree/I’m smarter than you.” I take care to say just why I think what I do, and why I think I’m right. I don’t ask for anyone’s trust or faith, I work on earning it every time. I don’t always succeed (especially around here, but I don’t expect anything but a hostile audience), but I do try.
And as far as Haruhi-ism… I gotta go Google that one. I don’t think I’ve ever heard the term.
OK… I’m thinking now that your mention of it was a joke. One that went right past me.
I’ve never said whether or not Mormonism is a cult. I know that it has some pretty odd beliefs and tenets, but as a professional born-again agnostic, I think ALL religions have some pretty silly beliefs at their core. So I tend to ignore the finer details and just judge the religions on the conduct of the adherents. And the Mormons I’ve met have been among the most honorable, decent, upright, honest, forthright, sincere, and downright nice folks I’ve ever known. So maybe I am a bit prejudiced towards them — I can live with that.
Zython, sorry I seemed to ignore you. Between Sean’s coming up with reasonable questions (often just before you did) and Strow’s frothing gibberish, I missed them.
The crux of my point remains, though: Oliver found the cartoon and thought it worthy of spreading it far and wide, despite admitting that “I don’t know enough about Mormon theology to know if this bit of propaganda is accurate or not…”
To me, that would instantly disqualify it from my spreading it further. (Kind of like the “Obama is secretly a Muslim” bullshit.) If I wanted to post it, I’d want to know how accurate it was. Oliver didn’t. To me, that reflects very poorly on him.
J.
And as far as Haruhi-ism… I gotta go Google that one. I don’t think I’ve ever heard the term.
OK… I’m thinking now that your mention of it was a joke. One that went right past me.
It was a social experiment that I executed a little while back to expose the elitism in the definition of “religion” (kinda like FSM). Thank you for proving my point.
I haven’t looked into the origins of the cartoon, either. Well, in my defense, I’ll say that I’m not saying anything about it at all, because I simply don’t have any info to judge upon.
If you have no info to judge it on, how can you call it “anti-mormon” in the first place?
My agenda is simple: to say what O’Riley tells me to think
Fixed that little typo for you.
“I also looked at the YouTube poster’s other videos, and almost half of them are anti-Mormon. So the guy has an agenda. That doesn’t make him wrong, but it doesn’t help him, either.”
This part is very telling. You attack someone for having an agenda, not for being wrong. You are committing a text book Ad Hominem fallacy. And worse yet, you seem to have no issue with that.
You commit the same fallacy when you bring up Media Matters and Oliver Willis. And you do that a lot.
“I quoted the Shakespeare bit …”
Glad you cleared that up. I thought it was because of your inflated sense of your own importance.
But, Jay, I need another explanation from you. In this thread you wrote:
But today you threw up this “piece”:
Are you a complete idiot? Or just an idiot during non-work hours?