Ed Whelan Is A Big Ass Baby

10:49 am EST June 7th, 2009 | News | 11 Comments

Point out a lying conservative, and they lose their mess and get personally destructive. That’s true if it’s the vice president of the United States down to a intellectually dishonest writer for National Review like Ed Whelan.

Of course, for publications like National Review and The Weekly Standard, intellectually dishonest = regular contributor.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

11 Responses to “Ed Whelan Is A Big Ass Baby”

  1. jr says:
    June 7, 2009 at 11:09 am

    Cons are all ticking Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction timebombs

  2. Amused Observer says:
    June 7, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    LOL,
    Some of Glenn’s finest moments were in that film.

    But to the subject at hand, I’d say that was one lame ass move. Ben Franklin would not approve!

  3. Rheinhard says:
    June 7, 2009 at 1:57 pm

    If you needed any further proof that Whelan is a petty childish little bitch, don’t forget his whiny mewling complaints about Glennzilla when Glenn pointed out that Whelan was straight up lying that in his claim that the WaPo had never reported Biden’s “we’re gonna have a crisis that will test his mettle” quote (presumably because the WaPo is a part of the secret liberal cabal never to print anything which could be perceived as damaging to Pres. Hussein Obama X), by simply spending about 30 seconds on teh Google. For pointing out this almost clownish conspiracy theory had feet of clay by simple objective facts, Whelan calls Glenn “unhinged”.

    Not unexpected, of course, since for 8 years these clowns got away with calling anyone who asked any serious probing questions about what they were doing “unhinged”. Now that they’re not in control of all the levers anymore, they find they have to pay attention to the buzzing of the flies, and don’t like it.

    Eddie is basically the classic bully crying to teacher, “Waaah! It’s not fair! He hit me back!”

  4. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    June 7, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    Amused Observer: “Some of Glenn’s finest moments were in that film.”

    You must be fucking kidding. Either that, or you haven’t seen the movie in a long, long time.

    I just finished watching that movie on Blu-ray for review, and it’s shite. God, it hasn’t aged well.

    (Indecent Proposal is worse.)

  5. News Reference says:
    June 7, 2009 at 4:19 pm

    “jr”: “Cons [right wingers] are all ticking Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction timebombs”

    The modern day Republican Party as Fatal Atraction?

    hmmm, right wingers…

    Obsessive need to control. Check.

    Demands dictatorial power of other’s lives. Check.

    Generally crazy ideas and a little psychotic. Check.

    Go into insane rages when not submitted to. Check.

    Willing to destroy, even kill, to dominate. Check.

    “[H]asn’t aged well.” Check.

  6. News Reference says:
    June 7, 2009 at 4:57 pm

    “Amused Observer”: “Ben Franklin would not approve!”

    Of outing Publius? Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, wouldn’t have been too happy either.

    So much for any claim Ed Whelan might have had for the Federalist Papers.

  7. The Words “Irresponsible Anonymous Blogger” Get Tossed Around A Lot These Days « Around The Sphere says:
    June 7, 2009 at 10:46 pm

    [...] Now Oliver Willis has entered the colloquy, poking Mr. Whelan with a diaper pin and calling him a “Big Ass Baby.” [...]

  8. Jaim says:
    June 8, 2009 at 3:47 am

    Sorry, but if you write on the internet you are accountable for your words. People who think they can’t be connected to their postings are simply foolish.

    Whelan is an ass. Publius is a rube.

  9. Rheinhard says:
    June 8, 2009 at 11:05 am

    I’m OK with people being “held accountable”… a perfect example is the link I cited before of Glenn Greenwald showing that Whelan made a plainly factually incorrect claim, citing numerous references. If Whelan felt publius made an incorrect, inaccurate criticism he should address the specifics of that criticism, a la “what publius wrote here is wrong because of case X and precedent Y”. That’s perfectly legitimate. It’s not legitimate to say “I don’t like what publius wrote, so I’ve dug out his real name and home address and here it is…” The latter isn’t “holding someone accountable”, it’s basically issuing a soft threat, in effect saying “criticize me at your personal and career peril.” This squelches real debate and limits the vaunted “marketplace of ideas”.

  10. mediabob says:
    June 8, 2009 at 2:00 pm

    @ Rheinhard – “Now that they’re not in control of all the levers anymore, they find they have to pay attention to the buzzing of the flies, …”

    I like it! Certainly covers actions of the party-formerly-known-as GOP since they left town.

  11. Amused Observer says:
    June 9, 2009 at 12:13 am

    CS and I seldom agree but if he has just seen the movie again I must defer to him. What sticks in my mind is the elevator ride and entry into the kitchen. At least I think it was the kitchen. No boiling bunnies yet.

    And Jaim and I have never seen eye to eye but his take is perfect.

    But since Oliver might overlook this:

    “My Apologies to Publius [Ed Whelan]

    On reflection, I now realize that, completely apart from any debate over our respective rights and completely apart from our competing views on the merits of pseudonymous blogging, I have been uncharitable in my conduct towards the blogger who has used the pseudonym Publius. Earlier this evening, I sent him an e-mail setting forth my apology for my uncharitable conduct. As I stated in that e-mail, I realize that, unfortunately, it is impossible for me to undo my ill-considered disclosure of his identity. For that reason, I recognize that Publius may understandably regard my apology as inadequate.”