Comments on: Why Media Matters Is Bad for Liberalism

By: Is Reason.com supported by Radical Islam? « Throatpunch

Is Reason.com supported by Radical Islam? « Throatpunch — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 01:13:35 +0000

[...] supported by Radical Islam? In honor of the recent Media Matters (and Rachel Maddow) versus the Heritage Foundation controversy, I’d like to point out that Reason.com is having a “Webathon” in an attempt to [...]

By: Mark Thompson

Mark Thompson — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:12:30 +0000

Jan. 22, 2013(AP): President Mitt Romney was given a surprise early victory for his Administration when his attempt to nominate Judge Robert Bork as Attorney General was roundly approved by the Senate. Freshman Sen. Dave (ANP*- State of Confusion) delivered what is believed to be both the shortest and most self-defeating speech in the history of the United States Senate, resulting in every single Democratic Senator changing their votes to Yea in a matter of mere seconds, and Republicans moving immediately for cloture. Sen. Dave was one of initially dozens of Senators opposed to the nomination and asked for but ten seconds to deliver his speech. When his turn to speak arrived, Sen. Dave took the floor and said to the chamber: “I have but one word to say about this nominee: Inkblot.” Suddenly remembering his passionate hatred for the 9th Amendment, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer immediately went into caucus with his fellow Democrats. Approximately 30 seconds later, the Democrats returned to the chamber and Schumer made a surprise motion for cloture on the nomination. To the even greater surprise of all in attendance, the vote on cloture was 99-1 in favor, with only Sen. Dave voting against.

Judge Bork will be sworn in this afternoon in a ceremony in the DOJ’s recently-renamed (under President Romney’s sponsorship initiative) Blackwater Hall of the Iron Fist.

*Angry Nihilists Party

By: Koz

Koz — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:07:30 +0000

“So liberals don’t get credit for civil rights now? Or are you arguing that that didn’t contribute to public welfare?”

That’s a more complicated subject than most liberals tend to think. What’s not complicated is that most of the key events took place 40+ years ago, and are not directly relevant in our collective memory today.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:06:55 +0000

Inkblot.

Nuff said

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:05:31 +0000

Me too.

Let’s tell them to move to Scandanavia.

By: JosephFM

JosephFM — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:38:21 +0000

Well, there’s nobody as zealous as a convert, I suppose, and if you’re crazy against one side I guess it’s easier to just become crazy against the other than really reform your thinking.

By: Dan Miller

Dan Miller — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:34:14 +0000

So liberals don’t get credit for civil rights now? Or are you arguing that that didn’t contribute to public welfare?

By: Mark Thompson

Mark Thompson — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:27:50 +0000

Thanks, Kyle! Good catches in both those posts, by the way. One of the commenters in Patrick’s thread said it best, I think: “Conservapedia without the lulz.”

By: Kyle

Kyle — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:43:47 +0000

hear, hear...and tweeted. I've been critical of Media Matters for how sloppy they are, but I think you make a good case for how self flattering feel good-ery can negatively impact otherwise well-intentioned do good-ery.

By: Mark Thompson

Mark Thompson — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:34:11 +0000

Oh there were plenty of good reasons why Bork shouldn’t have been on the Court, and we’re better off that he failed to get on it. But the way in which he was prevented from getting on the Court (the whole digging through his video-watching habits and drastically misrepresenting his positions thing) didn’t much involve those good reasons.